of Colleges & Universities
A Study Sponsored By
Massachusetts Institute of Technology i
Northeastern University I
Tufts University '
University of Massachusetts— Boston
THE IMPACT OF BOSTON-AREA COLLEGES AND
UNIVERSITIES ON THE LOCAL ECONOMY
Prepared by the SDL Systems Research Group
February, 19 7 4
Boston New York Washington Toronto Ottawa Montreal
For additional copies of this report,
or of its Summary version, please
contact Charles Smith, Vice President,
Boston University, 881 Commonwealth Avenue,
Boston, Massachusetts 02215.
360 HUNTINGTON AVENUE
BOSTON, MASSACHUSETTS 02I15
Office of the President
October 19, 1972
Mr. George Mowbray
Higher Education Systems
SDL Systems Research Group
111 Avenue Road
Toronto, Canada M5R 3J8
Dear Mr. Mowbray:
This letter will confirm our arrangements for you to make a study
of the impact of the Boston-area colleges and universities on the local
economy sponsored by the eight major universities of this area — Boston
College, Boston University, Brandeis University, Harvard University,
Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Northeastern University, Tufts
University, and University of Massachusetts in Boston. We feel that
it is important for you as an outside organization to carefully examine
our institutions from this viewpoint and report back to us.
Higher education has become widely accepted in our society as
a source of cultural and social benefits; much of Boston's vitality can
be traced to its long involvement in higher education.
Yet a college or university is more than just an educational in-
stitution. It is also a major employer, builder, purchaser, financial
agency, and in general a contributor to the economy of its local com-
munity and the surrounding region.
In Boston, as elsewhere, the inflation of recent years has
squeezed the budgets of many institutions, including those in education.
Throughout the same period, municipal finances have also been strained
by rising needs and restricted revenues. Questions thus arise from time
Mr. George Mowbray
- 2 -
October 19 , 1972
to time as to whether higher education is carrying its proper weight
in fiscal terms. Under current conditions, property tax exemptions
tend to become more highly visible as a form of public support edu-
On the other hand, the immediate economic contributions which
colleges and universities make to the communite are not widely rec-
ognized. For this reason we are commissioning you to this study.
Representatives from each of our institutions will provide you with
the information which you need. This data gathering will be coordinated
by Charles W. Smith, Vice President for Finance at Boston University,
and you will report from time to time to a committee of the presidents.
We hope that the entire report will be ready for release early in
Asa S. Knowles
February 26, 19 7 4
J. Donald Monan, S. J.
John R. Silber
Marver H. Bernstein
Derek C. Bok
Jerome B. Wiesner
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Asa S. Knowles
Burton C. Hallowell
Robert C. Wood
University of Massachusetts
The SDL Systems Research Group has the honor to transmit to
you this study of the impact of colleges and universities on
the economy of metropolitan Boston. It is being formally
transmitted to you for release to the public, in your capacity
as its committee of sponsoring university presidents.
As the work on this project progressed, a few major observa-
tions gradually came into focus.
The most significant finding of the study is the importance of
higher education's monetary expenditures in the economy of
Greater Boston. Sixty-five colleges and universities in metro-
politan Boston, through their daily operations, students, visi-
tors, and construction programs, create annual outlays of $1.3
billion. More than half of this money comes from sources out-
side of the Boston area, and most of it is paid out to residents
and business firms within the area. This kind of economic activ-
ity is essential for regional prosperity. Business within a
region must serve outside customers in order to earn the money
that brings prosperity within the region.
1 1 1 Avenue Road
Toronto, Ontario, Canada M5R 3J8
Telephone; (416) 964-841 1
Education has become one of the largest, if not the largest,
industries in the Boston area, and this has proved to be very
profitable to other Boston industries. The expenditures by
the universities themselves and by their faculties, students,
and guests have become vital elements in the regional economy.
Despite the many economic benefits for the community at large,
the governments of the host cities do not receive any sub-
stantial fiscal benefits from the income generated by the
colleges and universities. This is because the prevailing
tax structure makes the cities heavily dependent upon real
estate taxes, and the money flows generated by higher educa-
tion do not yield commensurately increased revenue for the
host city as community income increases. Because of the state
income tax and other state taxes, Massachusetts, rather than
the City of Boston and other cities, is the primary benefic-
iary from the college and university ^'alary payments and busi-
ness purchases. This situation can be cited as an argument
for state aid to the cities to compensate them for the pror-
perty tax exemptions granted to colleges and universities,
which make up one of the largest industries in the community.
We would also like to acknowledge the help of many people in
the compilation of the facts that underly the study, which is
for the most part based on original research in the form of
eighteen surveys of faculty, staff, students, and visitors.
We thank the respondents for their cooperation.
Under the chairmanship of Charles W. Smith, Vice President for
Finance of Boston University, a steering committee supported
the work. Members were: John G. Bolin, John Danahy , and
John R. Smith, Boston College; Lester G. Loomis and Laurence J.
Higgins , Brandeis University; Celeste Arden and David Davis,
Harvard University; John A. Currie , Paul V. Cusick, and Walter
L. Milne, Massachusetts Institute of Technology; Loring M.
Thompson, Northeastern University; John A. Dunn, Jr. and Peter
Fitzrandolph , Tufts University; Philip Gartenberg, Franklyn W.
Phillips, and Joan C. Tonn, The University of Massachusetts.
Virginia L. Tierney represented Boston University and acted as
chief project coordinator for the committee. Frances P. Doonan
was our secretary.
Specific contributions of other individuals to the project are
noted in parts of the report. But the contribution to data
processing and interpretation made by Sylvia Fleisch of Boston
University's Computing Center deserves special acknowledgement.
Although this study was sponsored by the universities ,
responsibility for its objectivity and accuracy rests
solely with the SDL Systems Research Group. Consultants
of that group who assisted included Michele McGinn and
Steve Russell; their assistance, on both technical
matters and matters of judgment, is here acknowledged.
The report has been edited by Florence Trefethen of
I OVERVIEW 2
II UNIVERSITY OPERATING REVENUES 11
III UNIVERSITY OPERATING EXPENDITURES 14
IV THE IMPACT OF INSTITUTIONAL PURCHASES 16
V THE IMPACT OF UNIVERSITY CONSTRUCTION 20
VI UNIVERSITIES AND THE FINANCIAL COMMUNITY 22
VII EXPENDITURES BY FACULTY AND STAFF 25
VIII EXPENDITURES BY STUDENTS 29
IX EXPENDITURES BY CAMPUS VISITORS 34
X TAX EXEMPTIONS AND OFFSETS 39
XI THE ECONOMIC IMPACT OF THE OTHER 5 7
METRO BOSTON COLLEGES AND UNIVERSITIES i|8
Appendix A A History of the Boston
Educational Community 50
Appendix B Methodology 84
The 65 colleges and universities in the official metro
Boston area are directly responsible for about $1.3 billion
in annual expenditures . On the basis of surveys conducted
independently as part of this economic impact study , Boston
emerges as the leading center of knowledge in The United
States -- with m.ore academically based employment and more
students in relation to population than any other major
The analysis"*" of this report is primarily focused on
the cash-flow impact of eight universities -- Boston College,
Boston University, Brandeis , Harvard, M.I.T., Northeastern,
Tufts, and the University of Massachusetts at Boston. It is
supplem.ented with a more general review of the other 5 7
institutions of higher learning in the area. The area of
impact is The Standard Metropolitan Statistical Area as
defined by the U.S. Census.
l^Jhile universities are not often thought of as
businesses , they have a remarkable impact on their local and
state economies — ^s employers , purchasers , drawing points
for students and visitors, and developers who spend sums on
construction. They and their faculties, staffs, and students
are an integral part of the area's financial dynamics --
holding cash , borrowing and lending money , and paying taxes .
As tax-exempt institutions, however, they do not have to pay
local property taxes , a privilege granted by state legisla-
tion for the benefit of the entire state, but representing
fiscal support from local taxpayers .
Hard pressed municipalities are naturally tempted to
try to secure payments in lieu of taxes from educational
institutions as some compensation for the revenues lost to
local governments . But the principal fiscal element m the
situation is probably the taxes the Commonwealth saves by
not having to underwrite a major postsecondary educational
sector. This consideration has encouraged numerous
The study's methodology was based in part on John
Caffrey and Herbert H. Isaacs, Estimating the Impact of a
College or University on the Local Economy (Washington ,
American Council on Education, 19 71). See Appendix B for
further details on the aspects of university impact covered
in this study, and for other methodological issues.
suggestions of ways in which the Commonwealth might spread
the impact of municipal tax exemptions more equitably,
perhaps through some form of compensation to those munici-
palities most directly affected.
The direct flows of funds associated with the colleges
and universities of metro Boston, the main subject of this
study, are only part of the total impact force. These
institutions have consistently and conspicuously been a
major thrust in the intellectual and socio-economic process
in New England. The Boston knowledge center has not only
provided thousands of jobs in education, but has been the
source of many more through the creativity of its faculty
and graduates. One need only look at Route 12 8 with its
developments related to the application of engineering
science, to universities' contributions to health care
delivery and research, and their role in music and the arts.
The educational community has played a leading role in the
spectacular growth of service industries and high-technology
business in New England, thereby helping to offset the long-
term decline in the region's manufacturing sector.
A. BOSTON POSTSECONDARY EDUCATION IS A $1.3 BILLION
ANNUAL ENTERPRISE .
The 6 5 metro Boston colleges and universities, their
employees, students, and visitors, together spend $1.3
billion a year — most of it in the metro Boston area. (See
Figure 1.) The data refer to the study year 19 72.
1. A little over 69% of the $1.3 billion consists of
the $89 7 million in institutional operating accounts, 2.9%
of the $30.6 billion gross domestic product of the Common-
wealth. (See Table 1.)
2. Students are an important economic factor,
representing nearly 20% of the total university impact on
the business of the area.
3. Visitors spend $20 million a year in metro Boston,
4. Construction outlays amount to $120 m.illion a
year at current levels.
METRO BOSTON COLLEGE AND UNIVERSITY EXPENDITURES, 1972
8 5 7 Other Total
Expenditure Type Universities Local Colleges for 6 5
$696 . 9
69 . 4
19 . 8
9 . 3
EXPENDITURES OF 6 5 METRO BOSTON
COLLEGES AND UNIVERSITIES, 1972
TOTAL -- $1.3 BILLION
B. 51% OF EXPENDITURES ARE FUNDED FROM
OUTSIDE THt: BOSTON AREA.
A look into the "sources" of this billion dollar
annual outlay, discloses that about 51% of it comes from
outside the metro Boston area. The $6 56 million cash inflow
makes the educational community, in effect, a major local
"export" industry.! (See Table 2).
METRO BOSTON EDUCATIONAL MONEY INFLOWS, 19 72
5 7 Other
Inflow of Funds for
1. Of the major universities' total operating revenues
in 1972, 56% ($385 million) came from outside metro Boston.
Most of the operating revenues came from out-of-state
federal grants, student fees, and private gifts. The propor-
tion is judged to be smaller for the other 57 institutions.
This view has been expressed before. The following is
a quotation from the Federal Reserve Bank of Boston, New
England Business Review , April 196 5, p. 8. "In the long run
it would appear that one of the keys to the state's economic
growth is its education industry. Not only is it an export
industry, but also an important source for the development of
a highly trained labor force. Moreover, the presence of numbers
of skilled engineers , research scientists , and able management
consultants makes the intellectual climate attractive for
highly skilled personnel from other regions as well as new
firms." More recently, the Academy for Educational Development
has recorded an analytic assumption that Massachusetts employ-
ment in service industries will advance from 71% to 75% of
the total labor force between 1968 and 1980, as compared with
a decline from 29% to 2 5% for employment in commodity-
producing industries. See Higher Education in Massachusetts
(Boston, Massachusetts Advisory Council on Education, June,
1973 ) , p. 203 .
2. In the eight universities, 60% of the students
are non-local, many from out of state, and hence financed
largely from non-local sources . The corresponding percent-
age of non-local students for the other institutions is 27%.
3. Visitors' expenditures are all compared on an out-
of-area basis; they exclude any impact of visits by local
4. Construction funds have been allocated on the
basis of 50% non-local funding. This is a conservative
estimate, since the major universities (with the larger
building programs) have 6 8% of their alumni living outside
the metro area, half of them out of state.
INFLOW OF FUNDS TO BOSTON
THROUGH 8 MAJOR UNIVERSITIES, 19 72
Revenues -- $693.5 million Expenditures -- $696.9 million
C. METRO BOSTON'S POSTSECONDARY INSTITUTIONS GENERATE
PURCHASES OF $317 MILLION A YEAR.
The 6 5 colleges and universities have combined
purchases totaling $317 million a year — 75% of it ($238
million) in the metro Boston area. (This total excludes
construction . )
D. LOCAL FACULTY, STAFF. AND ST UDENT PURCHASES
TOTAL $43 3 MILLTOH AMUALLY .
The combined purchases of the employees and students
of the 6 5 schools approximate $49 3 million a year.
E. THE UNIVERSITIES AND OTHER EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONS
TOGfcT^lKR ARE THE LA!^(5ESY tMPLOVfekS THE
GREATER BOSTON AREA .
The educational services sector is the largest in
Boston (9.6% of the employed population), and represents a
larger share of employment totals than in any other U.S.
metro area, according to official Census data. As Table 3
indicates , the educational services sector outranks all
others in the Boston area in terms of the number of jobs
provided. Here nearly twice as many people are working in
education as in the labor-intensive construction industry.
Furthermore, the educational services sector creates
approximately 20% more employment than its closest rivals,
the health services sector (itself partly made up of
university personnel) and the sector covering financial,
insurance , and real estate establishments . The 40,000
employees of the 6 5 colleges and universities in the Boston
area make up about 37% of~the total employed in educationaT
services^ ( See Figure 3 . )
COMPARISON OF EMPLOYMENT IN EDUCATIONAL SERVICES
WITH OTHER ECONOMIC SECTORS - BOSTON
Metal industries and machinery
Electrical machinery, equipment S supplies
Motor vehicles and other transportation
Other durable goods
Food and kindred products
Textile mill and other fabricated textile
Printing, publishing and allied industries
Chemicals and allied products
Communications , utilities 8 sanitary
Food, bakery and dairy stores
Eating and drinking places
General merchandise retailing
Motor vehicles retailing 8 service stations
Other retail trade
Finance, insurance £ real estate
Business and repair services
Other professional S related services
Postsecondary institutions represent 40,000, or 37%,
of this total. In themselves they amount to 3,5% of
1,136,474 total employment.
Universities are heavily represented in health services
METRO BOSTON LABOR FORCE IN
SELECTED INDUSTRIES, 1970
F. BOSTON'S EIGHT MAJOR UNIVERSITIES OWN ONLY A SMALL
PART OF BOSTON'S LAND AREA.
The eight major universities own only 2% of all land
in Boston. This is a small part of the total and a small
part of the U2% of Boston land that is tax-exempt. As Figure
4 indicates , the eight universities ' land area holdings in
Boston are but 1/17 as extensive as government-owned tax-
exempt land, which accounts for 34% of Boston's land area.
THE TAX BASE OF LAND IN THE CITY OF BOSTON
I I Subject to taxation
UNIVERSITY OPERATING REVENUES
SUMMARY: Of the eight universities sponsoring
this study, only one -- The University of
Massachusetts -- is a public institution
receiving state operating grants . The others
are private institutions, relying mainly on
varying proportions of student tuitions,
gifts , endowments and federal research grants
for their funding. Of the $694 million in operating
revenues all eight universities received in 197 2,
72.4% ($502 million) came from private sources.
Furthermore, 56% ($385 million) of all operating
revenues came from outside metro Boston.
72.4% OF OPERATING REVENUE COMES FROM PRIVATE SOURCES.
Table 4 summarizes the income sources of the eight
major universities for the study year (1972).!
TOTAL UNIVERSITY REVENUE, 1972
Student tuition and fees
Private gifts & endowment
Direct cost of projects
Commonwealth of Mass.
Operating grant to U. Mass
Direct cost of projects
Student aid (understated) ^
( $ million)
16 . 8
Total operating revenue
The information for this table was taken from the federal
Several of these data merit special attention:
1. Slightly more than one-quarter (26.8%) of total
revenue comes from students -- about the same as from the
research and other funds from federal agencies .
2. Private gifts and income from endowments are also
a substantial source of income (18.6%).
3. Although details are not shown in Table M- for
each institution, the federal research funds and endowment
income figures are heavily concentrated on Harvard and
M.I.T. Conversely, the share of student fees in the revenue
pattern is much higher, averaging 51.8%, for the six other
4. The total "private" revenue contribution is
stated in the table as $502.1 million, or 72.4% of the total
revenues of the eight universities in 19 72. As footnote 2
indicates, however, this is a slight overestim.ate because
the "other sources" figure includes an amount for the
recovery of indirect costs on government-sponsored research
projects and other such programs.
5. Government sources of revenue total $191.4 million
plus the amount referred to above, or something in excess of
2 7.6% of total university revenue. This money, except for
the operating grant of $9.6 million to the University of
Massachusetts , is made up largely of federal government
expenditures on sponsored research projects , not subsidiza-
tion of ordinary instructional processes in the institutions
The other significant government item is student aid,
totaling more than $20 million in 1972.
(continued from page 11)
HEGIS (Higher Education General Information Survey) report
on university finances.
"Other sources" includes government funds categorized
as recovery of indirect (overhead) costs on publicly spon-
sored programs ($37 million).
Student aid excludes $5.1 million in scholarships and
grants by the Conmionwealth to needy or handicapped students .
B. 56% OF THE MAJOR UNIVERSITIES' REVE NUES COME FRO M
OUTSIDE METRO BOS-tOM: — $585 MILLION TW 1972.
A significant share of university private and public
revenues , as shown in Table 5 , comes from sources outside
metro Boston. Together, these outside sources total $385
million and account for 55.5% of university operating
revenue. The percentages note the bases of the allocation,
which, though not thoroughly precise, represent a reason-
able set of judgments.
ES TIMA TED UNIVERSITY REVENUE FROM SOURCES
OUTSIDE METkO SOS^ON, 1972
From Outside % of Revenue
Metro Boston Item
Sources (5 millions)
Student tuition and fees 111.4 60
Private gifts 8 endowment 64.5 50
Other sources 28.1 50
Subtotal private (204.0) (29.4)
Federal 175.1 98
Commonwealth of Mass. 6.1 50
Subtotal government (181.2) (26.1)
Total from outside sources $385.2 55.5
UNIVERSITY OPERATING EXPENDITURES
SUMMARY: The eight universities sponsoring
this study spent a total of $696,861,000 in
1972 to support their educational missions, a
large operation by business standards.
According to official reports submitted to
the U.S. Office of Education, 73% of this
total went into education and general expendi-
tures , that is , towards carrying on the
universities ' principal functions .
A. THE MAJOR UNIVERSITIES SPEND $6 9 7 MILLION PER YEAR
ON EDUCATION AND RELATED AUXILIARY ENTERPRISES .
For the study year 1972, the eight universities'
expenditures of $696,861,000 were allocated as shown in
Table 6 .
UNIVERSITY EXPENDITURES, 1972
Education and general
Instruction £ departmental
Maintenance £ operations
73 . 3
39 3 .9
75 . 3
55 . 8
Major service programs
9 . 9
Housing £ food
38 . 3
B. INSTRUCTION, DEPARTMENTAL RESEARCH, AND OPERATIONS
DIRECTLY SUPPORTING THOSE ACTIVITIES ACCOUNT FOR
NEARLY THREE-QUARTERS OF ALL OPERATING EXPENDITURES .
The $511 million spent for education and general
expenditures in 1972 represents 73.3% of total operating
expenditures. $394 million (56%) was spent for instruction
and departmental research, and $41 million for the main-
tenance and operation of the physical plant and other
expenses to house those activities.
C. 8% OF TOTAL OPERATING EXP ENDI TURES IS ALLOCATED
In 1972, the eight universities spent $55.8 million
on student aid, part of it supplied by the institutions
D. THE UNIVERSITIES SPEND $6 2 MILLION ON AUXILIARY
Food, housing, and other auxiliary enterprises
accounted for $61.6 million in 1972, 9% of total operating
expenditures. This kind of expenditure is offset, for the
most part, by revenues from those enterprises. The figure
represents a significant demand on the local economy for
both supplies and labor.
THE IMPACT OF INSTITUTIONAL PURCHASES
SUMMARY: Three of every four dollars spent
in purchases by the eight major universities
are spent in the City of Boston or in the
surrounding municipalities of the SMSA.
These metro Boston purchases, in fact, rep-
resent 30<: of every dollar of the universities'
annual operating expenditures and total $211
million a year at 19 72 rates. There is a
wide variation among the several kinds of
purchases in respect to their locale of ori-
gin, but, in the aggregate, university
buying is heavily concentrated in the Boston
A. THE MAJOR UNIVERSITIES' PURCHASES IN THE BOSTON AREA
TOTAL $211 MILLION ANNUALLY, 75% OF ALL THEIR
Out of their total operating expenditures of $6 9 7
million, the major universities spend $282 million (42%)
on purchases of supplies , materials , and equipment for
current operations . This excludes any expenditures on their
construction programs on capital account. Of the $2 82
million in purchases in 1972, $211 million (75%) was spent
in the metro Boston area. In other words, no less than 30<;:
on every dollar of university operating expenditures goes
directly into the Boston metro area.
UNIVERSITY PURCHASES, 1972
Area of Purchases
Amount ($ Millions)
City of Boston
Other SMSA localities
Other parts of Mass.
Out of state
138 . 8
20 . 5
B. THE HIGH VOLUME OF UNIVERSITY PURCHASES IN METRO
BOSTON IS CONCENTRATED WITHIN CERTAIN MAJOR
Purchase cATtSOkTES .
Equipment 5 supplies, maintenance, and utilities account
for $151 million (54%) of the eight universities' purchases,
with another $62 million (22%) spent for "other" unspecified
items. Except for equipment, half of which is purchased out
of state, expenditures in all these categories are over-
whelmingly concentrated in metro Boston. Table 8 summarizes
the objects of purchase and the localities where purchases
were reported to have been made in 1972 .-^
Some of the data displayed in Table 8 (purchases in
1972) merit special attention:
1. 7 8% of supplies, amounting to $42 million, came
from metro Boston.
2. Equipment purchases were much less likely to be
local in origin, with 5 7% being procured from outside the
metro area, the bulk of this from out of state. Metro
Boston's share amounted to about $2 3 million.
Neither purchasing records nor purchasing agents in
most colleges and universities are reliable sources of infor
mation on the actual sources of the goods bought for
operations and construction. Thus, even a "sampling" of
transactions is not a sure way of finding "facts." Univer-
sity administrators are busy doing their jobs , not social
research on the ultimate origins of what they are ordering
or paying for. Typical metropolitan economic structures
indicate that about half the items bought in a metropolitan
area are likely to be produced (to a greater or lesser
extent) in that area. The complex of materials, processing
labor and equipment, and transportation, indicates an
indeterminate solution for this problem. University records
are thus not ideally suited to the extraction of this kind
of information, and in some cases estimates were made on the
basis of informed judgment by university and project
personnel. Moreover, the place of purchase, as identified
in primary records of the institution, may or may not be the
location of the main "production" impact of the purchases.
3. Almost all job printing was locally purchased --
91% from either Boston or the surrounding area.
4. 81% of maintenance purchases for day-to-day
operations of the universities came from the local area --
amounting to some $13 million.
5. Although 91% of the travel expenditures are
recorded as having been purchased locally, one can assume
that, in fact, the bulk of this money was spent on travel
outside the metro area.
6 . Bookstore purchases and library acquisitions were
largely (60%) made outside the state altogether. Slightly
more than one-third (36%) were made in Boston and the
surrounding localities .
7. Utility service purchases were almost entirely
from local suppliers (99%) for a total of $27 million.
8. Food and food contract purchases were a sizeable
portion (5.6%) of the universities' purchases; of the $16
million, 88% or $14 million was placed with suppliers in
Boston or the surrounding towns .
9. The residual item of purchases not specified in
other categories -- a total of $62 m.illion in 1972 -- was
also largely local. About 90% was spent in the local area,
one-third in Boston, the rest in the surrounding munici-
10. Within the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, univer-
sity purchases were heavily concentrated in Boston and other
local areas of the SMSA. Only 4.7% of purchases are
estimated to have been made in the state but outside the
SUMMARY OF 19 72 INSTITUTIONAL PURCHASES
Category of Purchases
Location (values in $000)
5 3,69 5
/ , 4 7 3
2 5 ,8 29
b , 2 8 8
44 . 8
c c n c
15 ,8 37
1 1 n o T
4 , y z /
59 . 8
12 , 3b
1 9 U Ll
-L , Z H- H-
Q 7 Ll '5
25 . 3
o n o
o , / y Z
% of TOTAL
THE IMPACT OF UNIVERSITY CONSTRUCTION
SUMMARY: Since 19 50, the eight major univer-
sities of this study have spent $647 million
on construction and had a backlog of work
not yet completed at the end of 19 72 of about
$75 million more. About 55% of the total
already spent, or $356 million, has been
spent in metro Boston. That percentage in-
cludes virtually all of the labor costs , and
represents a major direct addition to the
employment level within the area economy.
A. SINCE 1950, THE MAJOR UNIVERSITIES HAVE SPENT
$647 MILLION ON BOSTON-AREA CONSTRUCTION .
From a base of postwar building programs and a physi-
cal plant at that time of roughly $100 million, the
institutions in this study spent $70 million on construction
in the 1950 's. After Sputnik (1957), the rate of construc-
tion increased dramatically. In the 1960 's, the eight
universities spent $330 million on construction.
Between 1970 and the end of 1972, they added a further
$246 million, with a backlog of work uncompleted at the end
of the year of another $75 million or thereabouts. Exclud-
ing this backlog, the total for the 22 years has been $647
million -- a very large building program by New England
B. UNIVERSITY CONSTRUCTION HAS A POWERFUL IMPACT
ON THE LOCAL eCOnT^HT:
With minor exceptions , the cost of commercial-type
construction of the kind that predominates in university
building programs has long tended to be half labor and half
materials or equipment . This old industry rule that
buildings are half labor has persisted despite strenuous
efforts to cut labor costs through various new approaches.
While the construction industry has become much more
efficient in its work over the years , it is still rather
labor-intensive. A big building project therefore means many,
local jobs, especially in the lesser skills.
It is not accidental that job-creating programs in m.any
areas emphasize construction of various kinds. Its high
labor content guarantees direct employment effects on the
local scene. This suggests that the $3 30 million the uni-
versities spent on construction in the 1960 's (a period of
otherwise relative stability in construction in the metro
Boston area) must have had a profound effect upon the local
economy. Local employment in construction rose by about
20% in that period, whereas total employment rose by about
C. ABOUT 55% OF CONSTRUCTION OUTLAYS STAY
IN THE METRO BOSTON ECONOMY l
Investigations of the local construction industry
indicate that 55% of construction outlays are directed
towards locally supplied services and materials:
1. Almost all labor costs of construction (half
the cost of most projects) are a direct
addition to the employment level in the local
economy . ^
2. The "import" component of materials and
equipment for local university construction
is rather high: probably 90% of non-labor
input is brought into the metro area.
(Items such as installed scientific equip-
ment, furniture, or art work are not considered
here . )
D. POSTWAR CONSTRUCTION TO THE END OF 19 7 2 HAS MEANT
$356 MILLION IN WAGES AND LOCAL PURCHASES .
Since the major wave of postwar construction started
in the 1950 's, the eight universities of the Boston area
have allocated an estimated 55% of their $647 million in
construction outlays, in effect, to local job creation and
local material purchases .
The university construction program contributes to the
position of these institutions as one of the strongest
forces for economic growth in the metro Boston area.
UNIVERSITIES AND THE FINANCIAL COMMUNITY
SUMMARY: Since the building and operating of
a major university requires a large amount of
money, it is not surprising that the eight
universities sponsoring this study have con-
siderable weight in local money markets . Of
the $2.1 billion in combined assets these
universities hold, nearly $2 billion is in
metro Boston. Their faculties, staffs, and
students have local bank accounts totaling
$224 million. These sums make the universi-
ties substantial suppliers of funds for other
borrowers. In addition, the eight universities
themselves are the borrowers of $130 million,
half of their loans negotiated with Boston
area agencies. Furthermore, the universities
encourage an inflow of funds through the
gifts of their benefactors — a combined $515
million since the beginning of 1967, a
substantial part of this from out of state.
A. UNIVERSITIES ARE SOURCES OF FUNDS WORTH NEARLY
?2 BILLION IN THE METRO BOSTON COMMUNITY . ^
The eight major universities have combined assets in
cash and marketable securities totaling $2.1 billion. Cash
alone amounts to $29 million. Of the balance of liquid
assets and marketable securities, $1.9 billion is in revenue-
generating portfolio investments .
Part of this money represents short-term investments
made in managing cash flows. The bulk is endowment invest-
ments resulting from past gifts from friends of the
A pool of funds of such magnitude makes the universi-
ties, in some respects, financial institutions in their own
right. They offer funds to other parties in the money
market. They support the borrowers of the area. Some 8 3%
of their liquid assets are in the metro Boston area,
(mostly in the City), and 96% of their portfolio securities.
B. FACULTY AND STAFF HAVE $19 6 MILLION
IN LOCAL BANKS .
Surveys of faculty and staff expenditure patterns
carried out for this project indicate a total of $19 5.6
million in local bank accounts: $22.8 million in checking
accounts and $172.8 in savings accounts. (These figures
allow for responses indicating "non-ownership" of such
accounts, and, since such data may be non-responses, the
estimates are almost certainly low.)
The employees of the major schools thus have nearly
seven times as much cash in the bank as their employers I
This money is an important element in the area's banking
industry. It represents money for borrowers of all kinds
and one form of support for the regional economy.
C. STUDENTS HAVE BANK ACCOUNTS
tOtALIMg $25 HILLTOP .
One would not expect the students of a university to
be as highly capitalized as their elders on the payroll
because most of them are not gainfully employed. Even so,
the 70,000 students of the eight major universities have
bank accounts estimated to total $28 million: $21.8 million
in savings accounts and $6.2 million in checking accounts. 1
Students , it seems , are a significant source of funds
for the money market. It is not surprising that some banks
like having campus branches .
D. UNIVERSITIES ARE ALSO LARGE BORROWERS:
?130 MILLTM^ '
While not all university borrowings represent demand
for funds in the Boston money markets , it is significant
that the combined borrowings of the eight institutions total
$130 million. The distribution by type of borrowing is
enumerated in Table 9 .
This information was computed from surveys of student
finances carried out at each school. Just over half of the
respondents do not have bank accounts , according to student
surveys. This may or may not be true. The computed
estimate of $2 8 million may be on the low side.
Average outstanding bank
Bonds, mortgages J security
101 ,215 ,000
7 ,404 ,000
$ 130 ,095 ,000
The universities , as borrowers as well as lenders ,
are thus a potent force in Boston area money markets and
important contributors to the earnings of private and
institutional investors . According to university records ,
half of these loans were made in Boston itself, most of
the rest outside the metro area altogether (particularly
in New York ) .
E. FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT SERVICES TO THE UNIVERSITIES
EXCEED $1 MILLION A YEAR .
Brokerage, counseling, and other fees in excess of
$1 million a year are paid by the major universities, an
estimated 55% of this ($605,000) to Boston firms.
F. GIFTS TO THE UNIVERSITIES ARE A SOURCE
OF MONEY INFLOW TO METRO BOSTON .
In the six years since the beginning of 196 7, the eight
universities have received gifts totaling $515 million, a
rate of $85 million per year on the average. Harvard and
M.I.T. are the main beneficiaries, as might be expected from
their history and size, and from the scope of their graduate
and research programs. An undetermined but substantial
fraction of this money comes from out of state.
EXPENDITURES BY FACULTY AND STAFF
SUMMARY: The faculties and staffs of the
eight universities sponsoring this study
number 35,400, with combined salaries of
$348.9 million in 1972. Ninety-two percent
of these employees live within the metro
Boston area, where they paid an estimated
$27 million in local property taxes in 1972.
Payroll deductions for Massachusetts state
income tax came to $13 million. Of their
disposable income of $2 39 million, the uni-
versities* employees spent $196 million
(82%) in metro Boston, $118 million on food
and housing. Their purchases of durable
and non-durable goods (housing and trans-
portation excluded) account for $1 of every
$75 in metro Boston's retail trade.
A. FACULTY AND STAFF OF THE EIGHT MAJOR UNIVERSITIES
SPEND 82% OF THEIR $2 39 MILLION DISPOSABLE
INC0M£ WITriTN MmO BOSTOM .
In sampling! the faculty and staff at the institutions ,
the project group found that all but 8% reside within the
metro Boston area. Including personal and business travel,
members of the university community spend an estimated 18%
The sample consisted of 4,487 replies to a question-
naire sent to members of the faculty and staff of the eight
universities. It is a 12% sample. Data concerning the
dollar amounts of expenditure were supplemented by university
information on the location of employees. U.S. Department
of Labor statistics on family expenditure patterns were used
to allocate consumer expenditures to the main items in
household budgets . In this analysis , intermediate family
patterns were chosen ($12,819 income) which correspond
closely to the institutional average in Boston. This method
is judged to be more reliable than trying to elicit the
information from employees through questionnaires without
depth interviews. See U.S. Department of Labor, 3 Budgets
for an Urban Family of Four Persons, 1971.
of their personal expenditures outside of the metropolitan
The aggregate income of the faculty and staff was
$348.9 million in 1972. Of this, $110 million was deducted
for state and federal taxes , employee contributions to
annuities, and other payroll deductions, leaving $2 39
million in disposable income, $196 million spent in metro
B. FACULTY AND STAFF REPRESENT A $134 M ILLION ANN UAL
MARKET TQ-k COHsUHEk I)URAbLEs A^JD NON-DurAbLES .
Of disposable faculty and staff income totaling $2 39
million in 1972, $134 million went for consumer durables and
non-durables . 1 This inference is drawn from Table 10, as
the balance of expenditure beyond housing and transportation
(which represent 44% of the total).
In 1972, food and housing accommodation took up 60% of
the middle-income family budget, representing a $118 million
metro area market. Housing represented a $6 7 million portion
of this total. Respondents to the surveys indicated that
they spent 6.7% of their incomes on durable goods. The
figure is not an unreasonable one -- but it is clouded by a
question of how much went for purchase of motor vehicles.
-■-The breakdown of durables vs. non-durables is not easy
to compute precisely from the available data because the
"housing" figures in the table include furnishings.
EXPENDITURE PATTERNS OF FACULTY AND STAFF, 19 72
50 , 374
5 2 5 7
47 ,79 3
2 38 ,965
% in areas
PEOPLE SPEND $15 MILLION ON
Sixteen percent of the children of university faculty
and staff members attend private educational institutions.
The average family outlay for these families was $2,665 in
1972, totaling $14.9 million.
D. PURCHASES BY UNIVERSITY EMPLOYEES ACCOUNT FOR $1 OUT
OF EVERY $75 IM M^tRO b^STOM RETAIL SALES .
Excluding housing and transportation, university
employees spent $110 million of their disposable income in
1972 in metro Boston. This amounted to 1.48% of the $7.4
billion reported for retail sales in the area.^ This rela-
Retail sales figures for the Boston SMSA were estimated
from data in U.S. Bureau of the Census, Annual Retail Trade
Report; 19 71 (Washington, D.C. September 1972 ) .
tive value has been observed in previous studies and rep-
resents a significant element in local commerce.
E. UNIVERSITY FACULTY AND STAFF PAY $2 7 MILLION
IN LOCAL tayet :
At least half of the universities ' faculty and staff
members own their own homes , according to the surveys
conducted for this study. On these homes, they said they
paid $2 3 million in property taxes in 19 72 -- of which $20
million went to governments in the metro area. Some 17%
of this latter sum was paid to the City of Boston, the
remaining 83% to other metro municipalities.
Of the 35,000 employees, at least 15% reported living
in rented quarters. If a monthly per capita rent of $200,
annual rent of $2400, and property taxes at 20% of rents are
assumed, then each renter would be indirectly paying $480
in taxes. The total for 15,000 tenants is $7.2 million,
bringing the aggregate local tax payments to $2 7 million in
These tax estimates do not include state or federal
income tax payments or the various other state and federal
levies for fees, licenses, sales tax, restaurant/bar charges,
etc. In 1972, the universities collected $13 million in
state income taxes from faculty and staff. The Commonwealth
of Massachusetts 3% sales tax on selected classes of items
other than food and clothing yields several hundred thousands
of dollars a year from university employees, and the state's
5.7% restaurant tax on meals and drinks adds further to
EXPENDITURES BY STUDENTS
SUMMARY: Economic surveys of university
communities invariably reveal that students
spend most of their money in the immediate
area of the campus . This is valid for the
Boston area too: the 70,000 full-time stu-
dents enrolled in its eight major universities
reported spending nearly $156 million in
1972, 94% of it in the City of Boston and
surrounding communities.! A majority of these
students (60%) seem to come from outside the
metro Boston area. If it is assumed that
students are typically financed by their
parents , this suggests a huge inflow of out-
side funds for student spending in metro
Boston — up to $9 3 million a year. When
student spending money is added to other
external sources of funds , for university
operations , the total flowing into the area
probably exceeds that generated by any other
form of local economic activity.
A. STUDENTS OF THE EIGHT UNIVERSITIES S PEND $156
MILLION A VEAk, M IN METRO BC^TOT :
In 1972, the 70,000 full-time students in the eight
Data on student spending patterns came from eight
sample surveys carried out in each university, and from uni-
versity records. The total sample numbered 6,22 8 usable
returns. Input data were edited, weighted with participa-
tion rates in each institution, and projected from weekly
and monthly to annual bases by multiplication factors of 30
and 8 respectively. Summer school activities were ignored
insofar as they affect full-time students. Using Datatext
and SPSS programs , computerized analyses enabled the project
members to evaluate distribution and skewness and check
against master records for representativeness. However, the
survey was anonymous and confidential, not permitting any
follow-up of non-respondents. Hence its degree of represen-
tativeness on some questions is greater than on others .
Results were compared with those of similar studies and can
be accepted as having tolerable confidence limits . Pro-
fessor Ralph B. D'Agostino of Boston University helped with
some of these problems of sampling.
major universities spent an estimated $155,6 31,000, almost
all of it (9M%) in either the City of Boston or the surround-
ing metro municipalities . ^ (See Table 11.)
According to students' own statements, a student
typically spends about 70% of his money in the city where he
studies, the other 30% in the surrounding towns. There are,
of course, many crossovers: a student living in Cambridge
to attend Harvard or MIT spends some of his money in Boston,
while the Boston-based student may spend some of his across
the river in Cambridge. The same applies to the other
consituent area municipalities where institutions are located.
In 1972, student spending totaled more than $61 million in
Boston, more than $85 million in other metro communities.
Merchants and landlords in campus areas are alert to the
value of student business , hence the variety of establish-
m.ents near campuses geared to student trade.
B. Ul% OF STUDENT EXPENDITURE IS ON FOOD AND
ACCOMMODATION; ?6^ MILLION A YEAR .
Students spend $64 million for food and rent annually.
This estimate excludes dormitory meals for students
resident at the universities. For "rents" it covers only
the 46% of the student body who live in off-campus quarters
of their own. The numbers are for only eight months of the
year, not twelve, and exclude part-time student spending for
these items. The totals are, therefore, certainly a
A student typically spends most of his money in his
immediate campus area. This is reflected in the relatively
small figures for "other areas" in Table 11. The "rent"
reporting of 6% spent in "other areas" probably overstates
the am.ount expended beyond metro Boston.
On the student surveys , respondents could not be expect-
ed to estimate precisely where each item in their budget was
spent. So a general question was asked them as to the
proportion of their money spent in local areas, the citVs and
metro Boston. The application of these percentages is a
necessary constraint on the reliability of the area distribu-
tions in the table. Comments on this appear in the text.
The errors are to som^e extent compensating; in any event,
they do not m.aterially change the overall result.
DISTRIBUTION OF STUDENT EXPENDITURES, 19 72
5 u u u ;
2 3 ,625
12 4 7 8
% by Area
C. STUDENT EXPENDITURES FOR DRINKS, ENTERTAINMENT ,
DuRABLfc eOODS, And tRAV£L tOTAL $u7 HiLmTT
A YEAR IN METRO BOSTON.
By adult standards, student outlays on drinks and
entertainment seem to be relatively large in relation to
food purchases, but the latter do not include dormitorv meals.
Durable goods are also a large (15%) component of students'
annual expenditures .
Drinks and entertainment and durable goods, together,
represent a local market of $39 million a year. This
conclusion assumes that most actual expenditures correspond
with the students' indications of where, in general, they
spend their money. The "travel" component is 5% of the
total, or another $8 million a year out of overall student
expenditures while at school. It is highly likely that much
more than 6% of it is spent outside of the Boston area, and
to this extent the figures are somewhat overstated as far as
local impact is concerned. Drinks, entertainment, durable
goods, and travel accounted for $50 million in 1972, $47
million in metro Boston.
D. STUDENTS SPEND ABOUT $7 MILLION A YEAR
ON TELEPHONES .
Surveys undertaken for this study indicate that stu-
dents are important telephone customers . Nearly one
dollar in every twenty they spend goes for telephone service.
The total student expenditure on telephones is
computed from the surveys at $6.8 million in 1972. This is
only a little less than the $7.5 million outlay for clothing
(most of which is presumably brought from home and is not
reflected in students' school expenditures).
E. STUDENTS SPEND ANOTHER $18 MILLION A YEAR IN METRO
BOSTON ON LOCAL TRANSPORTATION AND PERSONAL AND
MEDICAL EXPENSES .
Local transportation costs are a large item in student
budgets — 8% of the total, $12 million a year. This figure
includes car operations, which partly account for its size.
Personal and medical expenses at 4% of budgets , a
total of $6.4 million a year, seem to be relatively small by
adult standards . This may indicate that parents pay these
bills for their children, over and above their allowances for
university. Also, health insurance plans have above-average
coverage in the income groups whose offspring are likely to
be in college.
F. STUDEN T EXP ENDITURES INCLUDE AN ANNUAL INFLOW
OF ABOUT $yS MILLION INTO METRO BOSTON.
According to university records about high schools of
origin and the responses of students to the sample surveys ,
about 60% of the students of the eight universities come
from outside the metro area.
To the extent that students' residential origins imply
their sources of funding while at the university, up to $9 3
million of the total of $156 million is coming from outside
EXPENDITURES BY CAMPUS VISITORS
SUMMARY: That special class of "tourists"
made up of visitors to university campuses
has been largely neglected in day-to-day
record-keeping and in economic surveys . In-
vestigations conducted for this study
indicate that three kinds of visitors to the
eight universities -- parents , friends of
students , academic and professional visitors —
spend nearly a million visitor days a year in
the Boston area, not to mention the time spent
by part-time university students from out of
town. This influx of visitors to campuses
accounts for expenditures of at least $15.5
million a year for food, local accommodation,
local transportation, and other purchases.
A. EXPENDITURES BY VISITORS TO BOS TON UNIVER SITIES
^R0feA5LV ExOe£D $15.5 MILLIOM PER YEAR .
Comparisons of detailed studies-*- of university visitor
expenditures by Boston University, M.I.T., and Tufts Univer-
sity, together with related indicators from the other
participating institutions , indicate that a minimum estimate
of annual visitor expenditures would be $15.5 million.
The calculation of visitor expenditures is difficult,
not because it is so hard to find out what individual
visitors spend, but because the number and duration of visits
is not usually recorded by colleges and universities.
Students receive visits from their parents and from their
friends , coming from various distances and staying for vary-
ing lengths of time. Professional and business visitors
Methodological contributions to , and direct support for
the visitors surveys were m.ade by Carl Nelson of the Boston
University College of Business Administration and by Brooks
Paine, a member of Dr. Nelson's graduate seminar.
come and go, the details of their visits largely unrecorded.
This study confines itself to consideration of four classes
of visitors -- parents, friends of students, professional
and academic visitors , and part-time students from out of
town. Their probable expenditures are enumerated in Table
Specifically excluded from this analysis is any
consideration of visitors to the campuses who stay to become
migrants to the academic community, either within the univer-
sities or in businesses surrounding the universities . Also
excluded are visitors (except for those in the four
categories mentioned above) who come to attend sporting
programs , cultural programs , and other university events , or
to attend meetings or entertainments which, though not
directly connected with the universities , are often located
here because the desired audience or participant list lives
in the area.
EXPENDITURES BY CAMPUS VISITORS, 1972
Parents 5 . 5
Part-time students 1.6
B. PARENTS SPEND ABOUT $5.5 MILLION A YEAR WHILE VISITING
STUDENTS AT METRO BOSTON UNIVERSITIES .
Surveys among students and parents conducted for this
study indicate that 39% of students at the eight major univer-
sities were visited by their parents in 1972. Parents from
This analysis is based in part on special surveys
carried out by Boston-area university personnel. The results
are consistent with those of a similar study at the University
of Pittsburgh in 19 72, carried out by the SDL Systems Research
out of town (about 60% of students enrolled on a full-time
basis come from outside metro Boston) visit, on the average,
just over twice a year and stay about 2.8 days on each
visit. In all, it is estimated that visits to students by
parents during 1972 accounted for 183,000 visitor days in
30,000 visits, the vast majority from outside the metro area
(Visits from nearby parents are, of course, rarer and have
little economic impact.)
Visiting parents' per diem expenditures range from
$12 to $40+. The surveys clearly indicate that the typical
expenditure rate for a party of parents from out of state
is $78 a day for an average party of 2.U, or $33 per person.
In-state parents traveling from points nearer Boston spend
about $45 a day for the same size party, or $19 per person.
Those coming to town just for the day typically spend $12
on purchases connected with their trips . Detailed surveys
among students in the participating universities and their
parents yield a weighted average per diem expenditure of
almost exactly $30 for an out-of-town parent, which, multi-
plied by 183,000 visitor days, totals $5.5 million. 1 This
is judged to be a reliable figure.
C. FRIENDS VISITING STUDENTS AT BOSTON UNIVERSITIES
BRING IN 3 7.1 MILLION ANNUALLY .
Friends who come to visit students at Boston's eight
major universities certainly spend, on the average,
considerably less each day than visiting parents. But they
come more often, and they stay much longer. Surveys
conducted for this study indicate that 66% of the students
were visited by friends in 1972 in visits lasting a day or
more. The average number of such visits received during
the year was five, the average length almost exactly three
No reliable figures on the per diem, expenditures of
students' friends or on the distance traveled in their
visits to metro Boston are available. For this reason, the
daily spending rate has been estimated conservatively at
If this computation is compared with the 1972 study
carried out at the University of Pittsburg, a straight extra
polation to Boston on the basis of student enrollments
would yield $6.1 m.illion.
$10, about one-third the parental average. Since the visits,
however, generate 710,000 visitor days, the total for even
this conservative estimate comes to $7.1 million, 29% more
money than parents spend on their visits .
D. VARIOUS ACADEMIC AND PROFESSIONAL VISITORS TO METRO
BOSTON SPEND ANOTHER $1.3 MILLION ANNUALLY .
The academic community engages in considerable
intellectual intercourse : faculty members and staff travel
to attend meetings , to present papers , to take part in
experiments, to apply for jobs, to recruit students, faculty,
or staff for academic programs or jobs, to give guest
lectures, or just to trade ideas with colleagues in other
institutions. As Chapter V has mentioned, the travel
expenditures for the eight major universities in metro
Boston amounted to $13 million in 19 72 , M-.6% of total pur-
chases. 1 Since Boston is especially prominent among
university communities , one can assume that it receives more
visits than most.
In the absence of good records of academic and
professional visits to campuses, surveys conducted for this
project related the number of academic and professional
visits to the number of faculty members . The ratio of
visits ranged from 1.8 to 3.8 per year per faculty member,
with an average of just under 3. If these rates are applied
to the faculty counts at participating universities , a
total of 42,000 academic and professional visitor days
emerges for 1972. Since some of these visitors were compen-
sated and since some certainly did not stay overnight, it
is estimated that each spent $30 a day for a total of $1.3
million, probably an underestimate.
E. PART-TIME STUDENTS SPEND $1.6 MILLION PER YEAR IN
COMING FROM OUTSIDE THE LOCAL AREA TO UNIVERSITY .
Part-time students play an important role in Boston's
educational institutions : they constitute 27% of total
Examination of the research in the University of Pitts-
burgh economic impact study reveals that almost precisely the
same proportion of total university purchases was represented
by travel expenditures .
head count in student registrations. The economic effects
of these students, however, are smaller than those of their
full-time confreres . They may not go to school as long at
any one session or come back as faithfully to continue.
And many of them live in Boston or its surrounding communi-
ties and commute short distances from their homes or jobs
to class. Typically, part-time students are older and
already employed in the area, either full-time or part-
Interviews with part-time students in Boston indicated
that those coming from outside the metro area (an estimated
25% of the 29,000 total) spend an average of $230 per year
on a combination of recurring and incidental expenses -- the
latter reflecting an inclination to do some shopping while
downtown. These visitors (numbering just over 7,000 and
spending an average of $2 30 per year) add $1.6 million a
year to the local economy.
F. THE UNIVERSITIES' CULTURAL AND SPORTING EVENTS
DRAW ADDITIONAL MONEY TO METRO BOSTON .
Besides parents , friends , academic and professional
visitors, and part-time students from out of town, the
universities of metro Boston are hosts to additional visitors
who arrive for football games and other sporting events,
for concerts , plays , exhibits , and other cultural events .
Alumni of the universities are an important segment of this
class of visitor, for reunions, convocations and other events
of special interest to graduates . The amount these cultural
and sporting visitors and alumni spend is likely to total in
the range of from $8 million to $12 million annually.
Since this cannot be substantiated, however, the inflow from
such visits has not been included in the total inflow for
visitors ' expenditures .
TAX EXEMPTIONS AND OFFSETS
SUMMARY: Under the laws of the Commonwealth
of Massachusetts , the educational properties
of universities and colleges are exempt from
local property taxes . This represents an
undetermined dollar loss to local municipal-
ities in tax receipts , though a small loss
compared with that stemming from the much
more extensive government-owned tax-exempt
properties . The universities sponsoring this
study may be viewed as offsetting some of the
municipal services they receive by their own
provision of municipal-type services , their
community services, and, in some cases,
payments to local governments in lieu of
taxes . Although local governments may incur
net dollar losses because of the presence of
educational institutions within their juris-
diction, those same universities provide
large hidden financial benefits to the
Commonwealth as a whole and to its taxpayers .
A. COLLEGES AND UNIVERSITIES ARE NOT TAXABLE
UNDER CuRI^ENT MASSACHUSETTS LAWS .
Using its general constitutional authority, the Massa-
chusetts General Court has granted property tax exemptions
to educational institutions "to cherish the interest of
literature and the sciences and all seminaries of them."
Harvard has the distinction of being specifically cited,
having been founded in 16 36, two hundred years before the
tax acts formalizing exemptions for it and other similar
institutions in 1836.
Material for this section was provided in part by the
participating universities. Other sources include Edward
H. Dlott's study. Institutional Property Tax Exemptions
(Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation, Inc. , 19 71) and reports
of the Boston Municipal Research Bureau.
Even though they are not obliged to do so, tax-exempt
educational institutions may pay sums in lieu of taxes to
hard-pressed municipal governments. The Commonwealth
com.pensates cities and towns for the public educational
institutions located within their jurisdictions. And
private universities, of course, have always paid taxes on
their properties that are not dedicated to their academic
missions. No exemption has been promulgated in Massachusetts
on such non- educational properties as universities may hold
for investment and the earning of revenues. For these, the
colleges and universities of metro Boston are taxed like
other property owners , paying $4 million a year on their non-
This report will not deal directly with the question
of whether or not educational properties should be taxed.
That question is bound up with many social and political
issues that have little relationship to "economic impacts".
Among these are the pros and cons of basic reform in the
state/local tax structure.
B. REVENUE LOSSES THROUGH EXEMPTIONS ARE
BOTH HYPOTHETICAL AND ELUSIVE .
Since colleges and universities are not legally liable
for property taxes on their (non-revenue) educational
facilities, any notions or measures of "revenue losses" are
entirely hypothetical .
The problem of evaluating tax exemptions has been
discussed at length by Edward Dlott in his study for the
Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation already referred to.
Assessors , busy with their current tasks , can hardly be ex-
pected to spend time updating and revising exempt property
assessments which mean nothing in current tax terms . There
is also the valuation problem as such. How would one "value"
a university campus? Its book value might be too low, and
its market value really a figment of the imagination, since
alternative uses for major university facilities are in most
cases hard to visualize. There are other problems, too --
so many, in fact, that we reluctantly decided to abandon
the effort to discuss the dollar value of tax exemptions in
this report .
C. GOVERNMENT-OWNED PROPERTIES INCREASINGLY
DOMINATE BOSTON EXEMPTIONS .
Government property accounts for 81% of tax-exempt land
in Boston. If one uses property valuation figures, which may
or may not be currently realistic for tax-exempt properties ,
government property is responsible for 7 3% of property-tax
revenue losses through exemptions in Boston. According to
a Boston Municipal Research Bureau study on tax exemption:
The disproportionate concentration of tax-exempt
real estate in Boston has become an increasingly
important consideration in the City's attempt to
stabilize its tax rate. In 1972, 56% of the City's
total property valuation and M-2% of the City's land
area were exempt from real estate taxes. Govern-
mental bodies own most of the tax-exempt property
in the City, accounting for 41% of the City's total
property valuation and 34% of the City's land area.
Only 15% of Boston's property valuation and 8% of
the City's land area are held by non-governmental
tax-exempt property . During the period 1960-1972
governmental tax-exempt land increased 15.9% --
mostly by the City itself and by the Commonwealth --
while non-governmental tax-exempt land decreased
6.5%. The most logical solution to the tax-exempt
problem is for the State to spread the cost of
exemptions over the Commonwealth. However, other
alternatives are available which could be initiated
by the City. The overall City's financial problems
are not caused primarily by tax-exempt real estate,
which is only a moderate contributing factor. The
City's financial problems can only be fundamentally
alleviated by comprehensive tax reform.!
How do tax exemptions affect the increasing burden of
real estate taxes on the city's property owners? The Bureau
noted (p . 2 ) :
Of concern in Boston is whether a high tax rate
is caused by a large percentage of tax-exempt
property. VJhile there does exist a moderate re-
lationship between these two factors , the respon-
sibility for the rise in the tax rate lies primarily
with the City's need to increasingly rely on the
property tax to meet ever-increasing costs .
Boston Municipal Research Bureau, The Boston Property
Tax 111: Tax-Exempt Property -- Asset or Liability , Special
Report No. 10, April 25, 197 3, p. 4.
THE MAJOR UNIVERSITIES OCCUPY 1.4% OF THE
METRO BOSTON LAND AREA.
UNIVERSITY AREA IN METRO BOSTON, 19 72
Table 13 outlines briefly the relationship between
campus and municipal land area.
Area of the 8
Municipal Area Universities
Locality (Square Miles) (Square Miles)
Boston 45.40 0.90 (2.0%)
Other Metro 226.72 2.96 (1.3%)
TOTAL 272.12 3.86 (1.4%)
Although tax-exempt properties are reported to make up
42% of the area of the City, they are only to a minor extent
(8%) made up of privately owned real estate. The 8 major
universities of the city own 0.90 square miles of real
property, which represents 2% of the total land area.
The amount of university-owned property in the surround-
ing SMSA outside the boundaries of the City itself is larger
(2.96 square miles), but the proportion is smaller, amounting
to only 1.3% of the land area.
E. THE COST OF MUNICIPAL SERVICES ATTRIBUTABLE
TO THE PRESENCE Or THE UNTVfcRSTTTT:?
CANNOT BE READILY MEASURED .
A separate study of considerable sophistication would
be required to measure the cost of municipal services
attributable to the presence of the major universities in
this study -- to say nothing of the costs implied by the
presence of the other 57 schools of metro Boston.
While the universities provide certain municipal-type
services for themselves -- which would otherwise have to be
provided by the cities and towns where their campuses are
located -- they also create a demand for these services
which are then paid for by local taxpayers.
The institutions may require added fire or police
protection services , maintenance of utilities such as sewer-
age and water systems , or road maintenance on or near their
campuses. It is very difficult to apportion such costs on
an objective, scientific basis.
Colleges and universities may also add indirectly to
municipal costs: the cost of congestion, traffic control,
police and fire protection, and public works expense
occasioned by high-density student populations surrounding
the campuses , additional public transportation that may be
subsidized by the taxpayers, and so on. It is not entirely
certain that the population of students — or faculty and
staff members — pay their own way on such services through
the taxes they pay directly and indirectly to their munici-
palities. In fact, it may be difficult to determine,
ultimately, which levels of government incur the most costs
and secure the greatest benefits from these populations.
The flows of revenues and incidences on taxpayers are them-
selves relatively inscrutable. The benefit matrix between
state and local expenditures is even more so.
In the field of municipal finance, the question of who
benefits and who pays has long been a subject of study and
concern. After diligent inquiry, we have found no
methodology capable of sorting out these complex variables.
Hence our decision to indicate in a "categorical" fashion
the nature of the implied municipal charges (without trying
to state them in annual dollar amounts).
F. UNIVERSITIES PROVIDE SERVICES TO THEIR COMMUNITIES
THAT OFFSET TAX EXEMPTIONS .
The town/ gown economic nexus can be looked at in
several ways. The presence of the colleges and universities
requires a total set of municipal (or state) services and
related expenditures . If some of these services are
supplied by the institutions for themselves , then to this
extent such services "offset" the total that would otherwise
Another hypothesis is that the total local-service
costs that can be imputed to the institutions is the estima-
ted value of their tax exemptions , or the revenue that is
lost to the municipality because of the existence of the
schools on certain parcels of land. Such a hypothesis
might or might not be true; if it were, the value of self-
supplied municipal-type services could be considered an
offset to the shadow tax bill of the higher education sector.
In addition to municipal-type services provided by
the colleges and universities for themselves , other kinds
of offsets take the form of community services rendered by
the institutions and perhaps their faculty, staffs , and
students. Community services may have a quite direct
relation to education as such. They may be performed
directly by members of the faculty and student body on
either a voluntary or paid basis . It is impossible to
differentiate the service elements into "voluntary" and
"paid" components , because the methodological problem
moves into the evaluation of volunteer efforts in the
community in general.!
In calculating the value of community services , we
have not included cultural events linked to the universities
but not directly dependent on them for presentation (e.g.
orchestral concerts). Nor have we tried to estimate the
social value of the several medical complexes associated
with Boston University, Harvard, and Tufts. While these are
all worthy of study, they fall outside our terms of refer-
ence as "economic impact" has been defined.
More tangible direct offsets to the cost of municipal
(and state) services -- municipal-type services provided
by the schools for themselves, and their identifiable direct
public services -- are thus neither exhaustive in concept
nor susceptible of ready evaluation. Together, they amount
to many millions of dollars per year.
If we were to consider the value of education per se ,
we could define more offsets. One benefit is the income-
earning power correlated with higher educational achievement.
Students profit from their university studies -- although
the self -selection element cannot be ignored. Graduates'
lifetime earnings alone increase by at least $200,000, on
the average. That represents a tremendous addition to
"human capital" in the metro Boston area, running to billions
of dollars on a life-annuity computation. Such values can
run into millions of dollars for individuals alone, in the
professions. This in turn brings secondary benefits of many
kinds, social as well as financial, to the community. For a
recent analysis of such extended benefits of postsecondary
education, see Stephen B. Withey, A Degree and What Else?
Correlates and Consequences of a College Education" a report
prepared for The Carnegie Commission on Higher Education ,
Berkeley, California, 1971.
1 . Municipal-type Services
Municipal-type services provided by the major
universities for themselves include portions of police and
fire protection, road repairs, snow removal, lighting, and
trash and garbage disposal. These services are provided
in approximately equal measure in the City of Boston and
in other communities of the SMSA.
2 . Community Services
The approximate value of direct social services
to the community by the major universities can be estimated
but cannot be measured reliably in dollar terms , Aside from
the data collection problem caused by highly decentralized
service delivery systems in departments, divisions, etc., it
is difficult to differentiate official programs under which
university people are paid from the important volunteer work
that frequently parallels or complements them. Here are
selected examples of community services:
Medical and dental clinics , health service
programs (including public health) ,
support for improved medical care for
people in the lower income ranges , or in
custodial/therapeutic institutions. These
are mainly provided through Boston Uni-
versity, Harvard, and Tufts.
Nursing, paramedical, and related social
welfare services , including day care
Legal aid, legal research, and counseling
Teaching, tutoring, and special education
Drama workshops and theater groups .
Library and related services.
Indirect support for the Boston Symphony
Orchestra and other musical groups through
Leadership in environmental management
training, river basin improvement.
Community projects in reconstruction planning,
housing and transportation system planning,
public policy analysis.
In an attempt to increase aid to deserving students
unable to afford to attend university, the major institu-
tions have recently added to existing scholarship programs .
The sizes of the awards vary according to the program and
The eight institutions sponsoring this study channeled
$88 million to students in scholarships, employment, and
loans in 19 72, as shown in Table 14.
UNIVERSITY DISBURSEMENT OF STUDENT AID, 19 72
Type of Aid Amount ($) % Total
Scholarships 49,127,000 55.5
Employment 15,811,000 17.9
Federal funds 8,813,000 10.0
Commonwealth funds 5,575,000 6.3
Universities' own funds 5,209,000 5.9
Work/study loans 3,915,000 4.4
The entire $88 million should not be thought of as
"community services" provided by the universities. Not all
the students receiving such aid are from Boston-area families
-- although the special Boston University and Northeastern
city scholarship programs are specifically directed towards
them. Moreover, a portion (16%) is from federal or state
loan funds or guarantees of repayment to the lenders in case
of the recipients' default. While this is a rather
subjective judgment, we would assign about one-third ($30
million) to the category of university-funded services to
local residents -- who might otherwise be helped in their
education by local or other government bodies . The propor-
tioning of this sum is based on the geographical origins of
students. This might or might not be reasonably included in
the list of "offsets" to the cost of municipal services
(benefits of tax exemptions), depending on the reader's
While tax exemptions are becoming increasingly valuable
to the universities , the universities are also raising their
level of community services and support to local students.
These actions help the municipalities, both directly and
G. THE COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS DERIVES FINANCIAL
BENEFIT FROM THE UNIVERSITIES OF METRO BOSTON.
The preceding paragraphs have suggested various ways
in which the major universities of metro Boston offset the
value of property taxes lost to local communities through
various municipal-type and community services . The tax
exempt status of educational property, however, has been
granted by the Commonwealth; but as state taxpayers, the
citizens of the Commonwealth realize large but hidden bene-
fits from the presence of private universities in the state,
particularly from so dense a concentration as in the metro
While it is extremely difficult, and perhaps impossible
in a study of this scope, to quantify in detail the benefits
that the Commonwealth derives directly and indirectly from
the existence of the universities — especially the private
ones -- several kinds of benefits can be cited:
State income taxes paid directly by faculty
Sales taxes paid by faculty and staff plus
sales taxes from student expenditures .
The series of revenues generated by the
construction and operating programs of the
universities — through their suppliers and,
in turn, the employees of these suppliers.
Contributions to the economic development
of the Commonwealth , especially in the
service industries and the inventive tech-
nology that comes from the institutions .
The substantial educational expenditures
that would have to be borne by the state's
taxpayers if the bulk of the Boston-area
educational establishment were mainly
TH E ECONOMIC IMPACT OF THE OTHER 5 7
METRO bOSTOM COLLtetS AND UNTVerSTTTes
In addition to the eight universities sponsoring this
study, the Standard Metropolitan Statistical Area of Boston
contains 57 other institutions of higher education. ^ They
vary greatly in size , from a little over a hundred students
to more than eight thousand.
With an overall full-time enrollment of 70,500
(excluding part-time students), the 57 other schools have
aggregate annual operating expenditures of approximately
$200 million. Their students are more likely to be local
residents (7 3%) as compared with those of the major universi-
ties (44%). In general, their economic impact is about 30%
of that of the eight universities .
Among the economic effects of those 5 7 institutions,
the following are worthy of note here :
1. Faculty and staff totaling 5,000 earn $57 million
in disposable incom.e after taxes and other payroll deductions.
If their expenditures follow the university members' pattern,
about 80% of this money ($"46 million) is spent in the metro
2. Institutional purchases total $35 mdllion a year,
75% ($26 million) in Boston or other metro municipalities.
3. Student expenditures are not precisely known, but
are probably in the neighborhood of $100 million a year,
mostly in the metro area. About $37 million of this is
spent by students coming here from out of town.
4. Although visitor surveys were not made at these
schools , a conservative estimate would place annual visitor
expenditure at $4.5 million (30% of the figure for the
The estimates in this chapter are based on returns from
24 of the schools (42%). For the most part, enrollm.ent data
were used to estimiate the aggregates for the larger group.
Readers are reminded that all statistics refer to the 19 72
"study year. "
5 . Student aid of various kinds totaled $15 million
in 19 72, 5 3% of it in the form of scholarships.
6 . Municipal-type services and community services
in these schools — which may have been under-reported in
our survey -- amounted to $470,000 in the study year. More
than half of this money went for campus security.
7. Like other schools, these institutions undertook
considerable building in the 1960 's and have now reduced
their rate of campus development. Even so, they are
currently spending about $2 million a year on construction.
8. In financial terms, the institutions reported
cash and portfolio investments of $161 million in 1972. In
addition, they had liabilities in the form of bonds and
mortgages totaling $53 million. They spent $500,000 on
financial management services , mostly in the Boston area.
A HISTORY OF THE BOSTON EDUCATIONAL COMMUNITY
A HISTORY OF THE BOSTON EDUCATIONAL COMMUNITY
A. BOSTON IS THE LEADING AMERICAN
CENTER FOR HIGHER EDUCATION^
Beginning with the founding of Harvard College in 16 36,
the interactive influences of religion, economics, and
culture have built the knowledge center at Boston to a
position of national and international eminence: 65 colleges
and universities in the official metro area. These institu-
tions spend $1 billion a year, employ more than 41,000
people , and put up well over a hundred million dollars a
year in construction.
But, of course, Boston's colleges and universities are
much more than businesses. The early history of education
in New England is largely a history of the greater Boston
area. The interests of the colonists, the rising scientific-
technological demands of the economy, and the original
stimuli of religion all interacted to make the Bay State
region an educational mecca. Nearly 7% of the population is
students, nearly 10% of the labor force works in the educa-
tion industry — these are the largest ratios among all the
metropolitan areas of the United States . The colleges and
universities of Boston and its surrounding cities and towns
are a primary factor in both intellectual and economic
development in that area.
B. METRO BOSTON HAS THE HI GHEST RATIO
Of Student POPULATION (5.5"^) .
Regardless of one's choice of indicator, the metro
Boston area is the knowledge center of the United States ,
and always has been. As matters now stand it probably always
will be the nation's leading educational area because of the
ways in which its growth is linked to religious, economic,
and cultural conditions in the area.
In our study region, which is the Standard Metropolitan
Statistical Area of Boston as officially defined for the U.S.
Research for this appendix was carried out by Bradley
Ware, Harvard graduate and volunteer member of the task force.
Census, the 190,000 students of the area's 65 colleges and
universities represented 6.9% of the population in 1970-71.
To facilitate comparison with other metropolitan
areas , we have used the Census definitions of both enroll-
ment and population in Table 1 -- which clearly shows that
Boston has the highest ratio of student population:
COLLEGE ENROLLMENT AS PERCENT OF POPULATION
IN MAJOR U.S. METROPOLITAN AREAS
Minneapolis-St . Paul
Number % Population
New England Board of Higher Education, FACTS 1972-1973
(Wellesley, 1972 ); U.S. Census Tracts , Table P^Tl Social
Characteristics of the Population: 1970 (for Boston and
other Standard Metropolitan Statistical Areas). This enroll-
ment figure, as published by the New England Board of Higher
Education, is 27% larger than the 149,420 reported in tnc
19 70 U.S. Census for the area's students enrolled for
"regular schooling . . . which may advance a person toward . . .
a^college, university or professional degree". The Census
figures are for full-time students; those of the New England
Board of Higher Education include 40,000 part-time
C. MORE PEOPLE WORK IN EDUCATION (9.6%).
The role of educational institutions as employers in
the Boston area also reflects the prominence of education in
this part of New England. A greater portion of the labor
force is devoted to "educational services"! in the area than
in any of the other most populous U.S. urban areas:
1 ,136 ,474
10 8 ,907
1 ,178 ,990
102 , 381
Minne . St. Paul
1 ,267 ,643
4 ,607 ,100
898 ,0 37
1 ,878 ,497
2 ,826 ,565
762 ,30 3
1 ,570 ,953
2 ,852 ,017
In economic terms , the Boston margin is a large one
a 1% differential on this table is a participation rate
more than 10% greater than the nearest city on the list,
Washington. In gross numbers, the Boston labor force engaged
in education is exceeded by only four other large aggrega-
tions in New York, Los Angeles, Chicago, and Philadelphia,
all having larger populations .
"Educational services" includes employment in public
and private elementary and secondary schools , colleges ,
universities, and related services. The table is from U.S.
Census Tracts, Table P-3: Labor Force Characteristics of
the Population: 19 70 (for Boston and other SMSA's).
In the Boston area, education is an industry that, in
terms of employment , exceeds each of the categories of
construction, transportation, wholesale trade, health
services, public administration, and finance, insurance and
real estate. Education holds this strong position notwith-
standing the recent trend in Boston toward the service
industries and the particular prominence of the city's financial
institutions as employers. Boston's situation emphasizes in
very real terms the economic as well as the cultural value
of the colleges and universities .
D. THE DEVELO PMEN T OF THE BOSTON K NOWLEDGE
Center has b£em a symbiotic process .
From the founding of Harvard College in 16 36 in
Cambridge, and the beginnings of other institutions in the
early 1800 's, the higher education community in the Boston
area has grown persistently. Schools have been founded
because of the existence of other schools . Universities
have helped change the nature of the society and in turn
have been stimulated by these changes. Hence the notion
of symbiosis to help explain interacting forces extending
over more than 300 years. The process is still continuing.
New influences are still coming to light. They will no
doubt continue to do so. Boston is characterized by self-
generating educational growth.
History gives som.e of the explanations for the Boston
educational phenomenon. Samuel Eliot Morison ascribed
three reasons for the founding of Harvard when fewer than
four thousand colonists had settled around Massachusetts
Bay: (1) a learned clergy and educated men to govern the
colony, (2) trained leadership for the endemic confrontations
with European and Indian power centers, and (3) a search for
culture. "Comfort, decency and culture were as much a part
of the Puritan scheme of things as Congregational churches
and responsible government", Morison writes. "Common
schools, compulsory education laws, grammar schools such as
the Boston Latin, and the Cambridge printing press,
belonged in the same category."!
E. RELIGIOU S , ECONOMIC, AND CULTURAL
ir'ACTORS HAV]:! INTERACTi:^
Religious, economic, and cultural factors have inter-
Samuel Eliot Morison, Three Centuries of Harvard
(Cambridge, Harvard University Press, 1965), p. 4.
acted over the centuries to stimulate the development of
higher education in metropolitan Boston. While Harvard
had an initial effect, it remained for 171 years the only
college in Boston -- until the founding in 180 7 of Andover
Newton Theological School.
It was not until Boston's population exceeded
130,000 that a second liberal arts college was founded in
the area. A study of the establishment of Tufts in 1852
provides a good insight into the dynamics of growth in
Boston-area higher education. While non-sectarian. Tufts
had its origins in the Unitarian Church and an 184 7 meeting
of Universalists in New York City. As a nineteenth century
historian wrote, "the selection of the present site of the
college cannot be regarded as other than fortunate . . .
because of its proximity to Boston, the most important
literary center of the New World, where it may constantly
feel the pulsations of every intellectual movement that
takes place in the domain of thought... "1
While Tufts, like Harvard, was in part the product of
religion, it was also a response to the growing cultural
environment. This environment was to foster the establish-
ment and growth of many institutions which, in turn, would
contribute to the growth of an environment in which even
more institutions would share, contribute, and grow. 2 This
process is one manifestation of the collegiate multiplier
The establishment of the Massachusetts Institute of
Technology in 1861 marks the beginning of economic influences
in their scientific and formal sense — a complement to the
predominantly "cultural" precedents of educational rationale.
Evidence of this can be seen in the list of bodies that
petitioned the legislature to approve the formation of an
George Gary Bush , History of Higher Education in
Massachusetts (Washington, U.S. Government Printing Office,
1891) , p. 287 .
A list of these institutions appears on pages 60 and
61 together with a historical list of graduate institutions
established over the years by the major universities.
institute of technology:
Boston Society of Natural History
Boston Board of Trade
American Academy of Arts and Sciences
Massachusetts Charitable Mechanics'
New England Society for the Promotion
of Manufactures and the Mechanical
New England State Teachers' Association
The support of the Boston Board of Trade, the Massa-
chusetts Charitable Mechanics' Association, and the New
England Society for the Promotion of Manufactures and the
Mechanical Arts has historical significance and deserves
The demand for scientific and engineering education
was not accidental. The resource base in New England and
the nineteenth century trends in sector development had
an influence on education. Economist Robert W. Eisenmenger
has described the resource-poor New England economy as
"labor-intensive", requiring "... that a large amount of
human effort be exerted on a small volume of raw materials
to produce a high-value product". ^
Manufacturing industries in such an economy emphasize
"process" over bulk of product. They require advanced
technology and highly trained personnel. M.I.T. was incor-
porated for "... aiding generally, by suitable means, the
advancement, development, and practical application of
science in connection with arts, agriculture, manufactures
and commerce ".3
Bush, op . cit . , p. 287.
Robert W. Eisenmenger, The Dynamics of Grov7th m New
England's Economy, 1870-196^ (Middletown, Conn., Wesleyan
University Press, 1967), p. 6 . Our analysis has benefited
from the support of the First National Bank of Boston, and
especially the comments of Vice President Dr. James M.
Bush, op . cit ♦ , p. 288; from An Act to Inccrporate
the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
As textile, shoe, leather, and apparel manufacturing
declined in New England, technology-dependent industry
grew along with the service industries of insurance,
finance, medical care, and research and education. Such
employment opportunities attracted educated people who gave
their children the desire and money for higher education.
Jobs would be available for them when they graduated. More
liberal arts institutions such as Boston College and Boston
University were founded. They in turn were complemented by
the junior colleges and professional schools (see list of
schools in order of their founding at the end of this
The Commonwealth has a labor-intensive economy that
not only offers employment to graduates of its schools but
also — by the same token -- supports the influx of educa-
tional institutions .
The three major dynamics of higher education growth —
religious origins, economic influence, and cultural
interaction — all work together in a mutually reinforcing
1 . Religion
Schools with religious purposes or origins have
continued to reflect population trends : Andover Newton
Theological School, Boston College, Episcopal Theological
School, Hebrew College, Hellenic College, Pope John XXIII
National Seminary, and Regis College, to name a few.
Brandeis University, while non-sectarian, was founded by
the American Jewish community.
2 . Economics
Beginning with M.I.T., many of the schools,
colleges and universities have geared their programs in the
practical arts to occupations and professions strongly rep-
resented in the local economy. Such programs include
electronics, engineering, health care, medical technology,
and business administration.
Conversely, the local economy has gathered strength
from the skills, knowledge, and research of the universities.
Indeed, the role of the university in stimulating the devel-
opment of new industry and, particularly, of research-based
enterprise is another enormously important aspect of the
symbiotic relationship between the university and its
community. The most familiar example is that of the spin-
off company, which is created by the flow of people out of
university laboratories into the entrepreneurial stream.
This phenomenon represents a very important, but
little documented, economic impact. Boston area spin-offs
include such firms as Digital Equipment Corporation (from
Lincoln Laboratory), EG£G inc. (from an M.I.T. academic
department), Wang Laboratories Inc. (from Harvard), and
Itek Corporation (from Boston University). A great part of
the famous Route 128 business area was created essentially
by a series of spin-offs. Another example containing many
elements is in the aerospace industries where much of the
requisite technology was developed in the universities and
led to industrial expansion in new directions.
3 . Culture
Cultural influences were displayed in the origins
of higher education. Such influences are inescapable and
change with each generation. The high value placed on
education in earlier days led to the establishment of
Framingham State College (1839), Boston State College (1852),
and Salem State College (1854). The same kind of influence
has been manifested in the postwar development of junior
colleges and more recently in the decision to create the new
Boston campus of the University of Massachusetts.
Other cultural influences are demonstrated in such
institutions as the Massachusetts College of Art, Berklee
College of Music, Boston Conservatory of Music, the New
England Conservatory of Music, and Emerson College.
Culture, of course, includes more than just the
recorded cultural heritages that pass from one generation to
the other in the mores, customs, and laws. It contains a
strong element of engineering technology -- ways of enabling
us humans to exert "leverage" on our problems. Social
engineering is becoming almost as important as its scienti-
fic progenitor. The Boston knowledge center has felt
influences of this kind. A.nd it has contributed to them.
One manifestation has been in the form of inter-
actions between academic disciplines and social styles. The
phenomenon is still in its adventuresome embryonic stages.
But it shows great promise. An example is the Route 12 8
developments. It and many of the so-called high-technology
developments of the Boston area are in fact much more than
just the innovative fruits of engineering science. They
represent a long-standing but accelerated interaction between
university traditions, entrepreneurship , and tax-encouraged
financial resources -- all buttressed by the spirit of enter-
prise to m.ake money through new modes of business. This
symbiosis , which v;as enabled by the combination of academic
initiative and federal funding of military and space
research, has provoked considerable comment but not nearly
enough research. It is there, however, as a monument to
accidental genius , and one of the less observable impacts of
the Boston knowledge center. Not beyond the bounds of
possibility are interactions of this type in the field of
civil resource management and social service — as the
"university" grows beyond its walls to establish new inter-
actions with its neighbors and constituencies near and far.
The cultural symbiosis has perhaps already grown
beyond its former meaning, too. Cultural offerings of the
community encourage the development of educational institu-
tions , which in turn add to the cultural environment. New
elements are being added even today. It is possible that
students are being attracted to Boston and New England
because of an area catering to leisure-time interests of an
increasingly affluent society. Boston/Cambridge has become
America's "biggest college town". In recent years, enroll-
ment has grown with the increasing interest in new kinds and
forms of education -- particularly those of a continuing or
"lifetime" nature, of which Northeastern University is a
It ic it
Here we have tried to provide a perspective on the
nature and causes of the educational wealth of Boston. The
area has an economy that demands highly educated employees,
thrives on technological research and development, and has
the capacity to support dozens of educational institutions.
The tendency of graduates and universities themselves to
create off-shoot industries has resulted in a multiplier
effect and the Route 12 8 development. The complementary
nature of these processes is reflected in the growth of
educational employment -- from 7.2% to 9.6% of the area's
labor force since 1950, according to the U.S. Census.
THE BOSTON AREA'S HIGHER EDUCATIONAL CHRONOLOGY
16 36 Harvard University
180 7 Andover Newton Theological School
182 3 Massachusetts College of Pharmacy
1839 Framingham State College
1851 Lasell Junior College
1852 Tufts University
1852 Boston State College
1854 Salem State College
1861 Massachusetts Institute of Technology
1863 Boston College
186 7 Boston Conservatory of Music
1867 Episcopal Theological School
1867 New England Conservatory of Music
1869 Boston University
1872 Garland Junior College
1873 Massachusetts College of Art
1875 Wellesley College
1879 Curry College
1879 Radcliffe College
1880 Emerson College
18 84 St. John's Seminary
1889 Gordon College
1889 Wheelock College
1892 Chamberlayne Junior College
1894 Massachusetts College of Optometry
189 8 Northeastern University
1899 Mount Ida Junior College
1899 Simmons College
1903 Fisher Junior College
1904 Wentworth Institute
1906 Suffolk University
19 7 New England Institute of Anatomy,
Sanitary Science and Embalming
1908 Franklin Institute of Boston
19 8 New England School of Law
1909 Lesley College
1911 Pine Manor Junior College
1917 Bentley College
1918 Eastern Nazarene College
1919 Babson College
1919 Emmanuel College
1921 Hebrew College
1922 Weston College School of Theology
19 2 2 Oblate College and Seminary
1927 Regis College for Women
19 34 Cambridge Junior College
1937 Hellenic College
19 39 Endicott Junior College
1945 Berklee College of Music
1946 Newton College of the Sacred Heart
1946 Newton Junior College
19 48 Brandeis University
1948 Stonehill College
19 50 Grahm Junior College
19 51 Laboure Junior College
19 56 Aquinas Junior College
19 5 8 Quincy Junior College
1959 Mount Alvernia College
1961 Massachusetts Bay Community College
196 2 Newbury Junior College
196 3 University of Massachusetts Boston Campus
1964 Pope John XXIII National Seminary
19 6 5 North Shore Community College
1966 Blue Hills Regional Technical Institute
19 70 Middlesex Community College
19 70 Wentworth College of Technology
Growth of Higher Education in Greater Boston
Founding of Colleges and Universities 1636-1972
No. of Institutions
1636 1800 20 40 60 80 1900 20 40 60 1972
THE HISTORY OF GRADUATE AND PROFESSIONAL EDUCATION
IN THE EIGHT MAJOR UNIVERSITIES
1782 Harvard Medical School
1816 Harvard Divinity School
1817 Harvard Law School
1867 Harvard Dental School
186 7 Boston University School of Theology
1869 Tufts Crane Theological School
1872 Boston University School of Law
1872 Harvard Graduate School of Arts and Science
1873 Boston University School of Medicine
1874 Boston University Graduate School of Arts and Science
18 85 Massachusetts Institute of Technology Graduate Programs
189 2 Tufts Graduate School of Arts and Science
189 3 Tufts School of Medicine
189 8 Northeastern University School of Law
1899 Tufts School of Dental Medicine
19 8 Harvard Graduate School of Business Administration
1913 Boston College College of Business Administration
1913 Boston University College of Business Administration
19 20 Harvard Graduate School of Education
1922 Harvard School of Public Health
1923 Boston University School of Education
1925 Boston College Graduate School of Arts and Science
1927 Boston College School of Philosophy at Weston College
1929 Boston College Law School
19 3 3 Tufts Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy
19 36 Harvard Graduate School of Design
19 36 Boston College Graduate School of Social Work
19 3 7 Harvard School of Government
1940 Boston University College of Music
1940 Boston University Graduate School of Social Work
1940 Northeastern University Graduate Division,
Arts and Science
1946 Boston University School of Nursing
1947 Boston University School of Public Relations and
1950 Northeastern University Graduate Division of Business
1950 Northeastern University Graduate Division
19 5 3 Brandeis Graduate School of Arts and Science
19 5 3 Northeastern University Graduate Division of Education
1954 Boston University School of Fine and Applied Arts
1957 Boston College School of Management
19 5 8 Northeastern University Graduate School of Arts
19 59 Brandeis Florence Heller Graduate School for Advanced
Studies in Social Welfare
19 6 2 Northeastern Graduate School of Pharmaceutical
196 3 Boston University College of Engineering
196 3 Boston University School of Graduate Dentistry
196 3 Northeastern University Graduate School of
1965 Boston University Sargent College of Allied
1965 Boston University Metropolitan College
1965 Northeastern University Graduate School of
History and Purposes
Founded in 1863, Boston College is one of the oldest
Jesuit universities in the United States. Originally
situated in Boston's South End to serve local young men,
Boston College is today open to men and women of every
background. Its scholarly pursuits span the entire
spectrum of contemporary thought and interest. Most of
its campus is in Newton, a suburban municipality in the
western part of Metro Boston.
Current undergraduate enrollment totals about 8,000,
of whom 1,000 are in the Evening College. In addition,
some 3,000 students are doing graduate work in the graduate
schools of arts and sciences, management, social work, and
law. In 1972, more than 2,000 students attended regular
sessions or special institutes in the Summer School.
Although Massachusetts students continue to predominate
at Boston College (58%), the university draws part of its
student body from all over the United States and from almost
40 foreign countries.
Faculty and Staff
The College faculty numbers 544 plus 36 full-time
academic administrators .
Schools and Programs
In addition to graduate schools of Arts and Sciences
(including Education and Nursing), Management, Social Work,
and Law, Boston College consists of five undergraduate
schools: Arts and Sciences, Management, Education, Nui-sing
and the Evening College. A summer session offers a full
range of undergraduate and graduate courses in major
Boston College has 51,UU8 living alumni, half of whom
live in the Metro Boston area. The majority, about 34,000,
are between 25 and 45 years old — reflecting the growth of
the university since World War II.
The Board of Trustees of Boston College has the sole
legal authority and responsibility for the governance of
the university. In the earlier years of the College, the
ultimate authority rested in the governing body of the
Society of Jesus. Now the 35 member board, representing
a broad cross-section of the community, enjoys the same
autonomy as do the trustees of other private institutions .
For more information
Write or call:
President J. Donald Monan , S.J.
Chestnut Hill, Massachusetts 02167
History and Purpose
Boston University, established in 1869, is an independent
non-sectarian institution offering undergraduate and graduate
arts, science studies, and professional programs. Boston
University is one of two major private educational institu-
tions within the city of Boston itself. It is situated on
a 48-acre campus along the south bank of the Charles River,
with some its facilities such as the Medical School at the
Medical Center in another part of the city.
Present enrollment is approximately 13,000 undergraduate
and 4,000 graduate students. In addition, the university has
a part-time student population of some 6,000. A relatively
small proportion of the full-time student body comes from
the Boston area, and about 2 5% from the Commonwealth of
Massachusetts. The rest of the students are drawn from all
the states of the Union and a number of foreign countries.
Faculty and Staff
Boston University has a full-time faculty of about 1,20
and a part-time faculty of about 1,00 0. In addition, the
University has a staff of about 1,800 for administration and
Schools and Programs
In addition to the College of Liberal Arts and Graduate
School, Boston University has the following specialized
professional schools: Colleges of Business Administration
and Engineering, the Schools of Education, Fine and Applied
Arts, Law, Medicine, Nursing, Public Communication, Social
Work, and Theology, and the Sargent College of Allied
Special academic units complement the main program
structure -- the Medical Center (medical school, dental
school, hospital), and centers for African, Afro-American,
and Latin American Development Studies.
In Belgium, Italy, and West Germany, the university
offers an Overseas Program to 800 students, primarily
American military personnel. Four disciplines are included:
business administration, education, engineering management,
and industrial relations.
The university has a $21 million annual research budget --
medical and allied health professions, graduate schools of
arts and sciences, professional schools, and education.
Boston University has one hundred thousand living
alumni, half of them in New England, and thirty percent in
the greater Boston area.
Boston University is governed by a president, three
academic vice-presidents, three non-academic vice-presidents,
a university council of the various college deans, a
university senate composed of all members of the faculty.
A senate council acts as the executive body of the faculty.
The university has a board of 42 trustees which meets
quarterly to receive reports from the president and other
officers, approve appointments, programs, and financial
plans, such as investment policy, property changes, and
budget expenditure levels.
For more information
Write or call:
President John R. Silber
Boston, Massachusetts 02215
History and Purpose
Now in its 25th year, Brandeis University is a co-
educational liberal arts university and the first Jewish-
sponsored non-sectarian institution of higher learning in
the United States.
In 19 72-7 3, Brandeis had 2,350 undergraduate students
and 675 graduate students, with nearly equal numbers of men
and women. In recent years, the number of foreign students
has increased to about 200. Domestically, students come
from 300 schools in more than M-0 states. Approximately 70
percent of the student body lives on campus . About one-
third of the undergraduates come from Massachusetts , about
one-third from the New York metropolitan area, and one-third
from the rest of the country and overseas.
Faculty and Staff
Largely focused on the liberal arts , the full-time
faculty currently totals 335. The total staff of the
University — faculty and non-faculty — numbers about
The College of Arts and Sciences offers a four-year
undergraduate program leading to the Bachelor of Arts
degree in the creative arts, humanities, science, and
the social sciences. The Graduate School of Arts and
Sciences offers programs of advanced studies in 21 fields.
The Florence Heller Graduate School for Advanced
Studies in Social Welfare is the University's first pro-
fessional school and is a major training ground for social
welfare policy makers and teachers. Additionally, the
University offers its students and those at other American
schools a one-semester program of study in Israel through
the Jacob Hiatt Institute.
other programs and activities supplement the basic
academic functions of the University. Musical, theatrical
and arts programs on campus are open to residents of the
From its beginning, Brandeis University has committed
an important part of its academic energy to programs of
research and scholarly inquiry. Among the most recent
developments in research at the University was the creation
of the Rosenstiel Basic Medical Sciences Research Center,
a major facility dedicated to research, teaching and coordi-
nating medically-oriented work in the life sciences.
Since 194 8, Brandeis has graduated approximately 7,00
students. Of this group, 1,200 are teaching, mostly in
colleges and universities; 600 are practicing attorneys;
more than 500 are physicians; 600 are social workers; and
about 100 are members of the clergy.
The chief executive officer is the president, who is
responsible for all University academic and administrative
activity, and for the execution of policy established by the
Board of Trustees. The 40-member Board of Trustees (increased
to 50 beginning in 19 73-74) is the governing body of the
Brandeis Corporation. The Board of Trustees includes three
students, four faculty members, and the president of the
National Alumni Association. Serving under the University
president are five academic deans , and three non-academic
vice-presidents. The faculty elects a Faculty Senate of 22
members to advise the administration and to recommend
policies and programs .
For more information
Write or call:
Marver II. Bernstein, President
Waltham, Massachusetts 02154
History and Purpose
Harvard University is a private, non-profit, non-
sectarian institution founded in 16 36. Its main campus
is in Cambridge, with four of the graduate schools in
Boston. Harvard College is the oldest college in the
United States . Graduate education at Harvard began with
the founding of the Harvard Medical School in 178 2. At
present, the University includes ten coeducational graduate
schools which are the Medical School, Divinity School,
Law School, Dental School, Business Administration,
Education, Public Health, Design, Government and the
Graduate School of Arts and Sciences.
Of the 15,00 full-time students at Harvard University,
60% are enrolled in the graduate schools. Approximately 20%
of these are Boston area residents. Harvard offers part-time
instruction in arts and sciences through the University's
Extension and the Summer School. About 9 5% of the Extension
students and 2 3% of the Summer School students are from the
Faculty and Staff
The University employs 8,823 people on a full-time
basis. Of that total 3,700, including full-time faculty,
have appointments from the Harvard Corporation. The
remaining employees are in charge of the administrative
and staff functions of the University. In addition, an
estimated 2,000 people work in faculty and staff positions
on a part-time basis. Approximately 90% of all Harvard
employees are residents of the Boston area.
Schools and Programs
Harvard College and Radcliffe College are the under-
graduate components of Harvard University. Although Harvard
College is not coeducational, Radcliffe forms the women's
undergraduate branch of. the University.
The University library collection now includes over
eight million volumes , of which about 3 million are located
at Widener Library in Harvard Yard. Other related institu-
tions are: the Museum of Comparative Zoology, the Institute
of Plant Sciences, the Arnold Arboretum, the Astronomical
Observatory, the William Hayes Fogg Art Museum, the Peabody
Museum of Archeology, the Busch-Reisinger Museum of Germanic
Culture, the Semitic Museum, the Dumbarton Oaks Research
Library and Collection, the Centers for Hellenic Studies,
Italian Renaissance Studies and East Asian Studies.
Research is conducted throughout the University and is
supported by grants, gifts, and government income. The
principal area of research is medical. In 1972, $45,662,000
was received for research from the U.S. Government and 48%
of this money supported research in the Medical and Dental
Schools, and the School of Public Health. The Department
of Health, Education and Welfare, the National Science
Foundation, the Atomic Energy Commission, and the National
Aeronautics and Space Administration are the prime government
sources for research conducted in the University.
Harvard has 156,000 alumni including 52,000 graduates
of Harvard College and 104,000 graduates of the 10 profes-
sional schools and Radcliffe College. Twenty-seven percent
of the College alumni live in the Boston area.
Harvard University is governed by the Corporation and
Board of Overseers. The Corporation consists of the
President and Treasurer and five Fellows. The Board of
Overseers consists of the President and Treasurer and 30
persons elected by the alumni for six-year terms. The
consent of the Board is required for certain acts of the
For more information
Write or call :
President Derek C. Bok
Cambridge, Massachusetts 02138
MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY
History and Purpose
Chartered in 1861 as a Boston institute of science and
industrial arts, M.I.T. moved across the Charles River to
its present Cambridge home in 1916. Its founder, William
Barton Rogers, had worked vigorously for many years to
establish a new kind of school where young people "could
learn exactly and thoroughly the fundamental principles of
positive science, with their leading applications to the
The Massachusetts Institute of Technology is a privately
endowed and financed institution with its campus extending
more than a mile along the Cambridge side of the river.
The M.I.T. Community includes 4,10 undergraduates and
3,700 graduate students. Foreign students from 70 countries
make up 18 percent of the student body. The Institute
admits women, having presently about 46 of them as under-
graduates and 36 as graduate students.
In addition to its main campus in Cambridge, M.I.T.
operates three research facilities in nearby towns: the
Lincoln Laboratory in Lexington with substations in Westford,
Tyngsboro, and Groton ; the George R. Wallace, Jr Astrophysical
Observatory in Westford; and the 40 mev William H. Bates
Linear Accelerator in Middleton, Massachusetts.
Faculty and Staff
Faculty members number 950, and supporting administra-
tive, research and other staff on campus a further 2,200.
Schools and Programs
The Institute has broadened its curriculum and become
quite well known in social sciences such as economics. The
main emphasis continues to be on science and applied science
such as engineering.
M.I.T. has a total of 24 academic departments organized
into the schools of architecture and planning, engineering,
humanities and social sciences, management, and science.
These departments offer undergraduate and graduate instruc-
tion in some UO fields. A growing number of these are of
an interdisciplinary nature.
Supporting these programs is the M.I.T. library system
of more than a million volumes , and a network of information
processing services coordinated in the Information Processing
M.I.T. has grown into a major research center, with out-
side funding in the current year totalling $187 million. The
main campus has a number of research centers and facilities ,
including: the Center for Advanced Visual Studies, the Center
for Advanced Engineering Study, the Center for Space Research,
the Research Laboratory of Electronics , the Center for Mater-
ials Science and Engineering, the Center for International
Studies, the Operations Research Center, the Cancer Research
Center, the Center for Life Sciences, the Center for Earth
Sciences , the Center for Theoretical Physics , the Francis
Bitter National Magnet Laboratory, the M.I.T. Nuclear Reactor,
the High Voltage Research Laboratory, and Project MAC, a
center for advanced computer research. In co-operation with
Harvard University the Institute also operates the Joint
Center for Urban Studies .
Since its founding, M.I.T. has graduated more than
6 8,000 students. Recent expansion is reflected in the fact
that 59 ,000 of these alumni are still alive and living in
various parts of the world. About 9,000 now live in the
greater Boston area.
The governing body of the Institute is a board of
trustees known as the Corporation, over which the Chairman
presides. Its members include 80 distinguished leaders of
science, engineering, industry, and education and (ex
officio) the President, the Chancellor, and the Treasurer of
The Institute's chief executive officer is the
President. The Chancellor acts as a deputy to the President
OR all matters. In addition, senior administrative officers
of the Institute include the Provost, and eight Vice
Presidents. The academic program is directed by the
President, the Chancellor, the Provost, and five Deans, each
responsible for the undergraduate and graduate programs in
one of five academic Schools.
For more information
Write or call:
President Jerome B. Wiesner
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Cambridge, Massachusetts 02130
History and Purpose
Northeastern University has pioneered in the development
of both co-operative education and continuing education for
adults. Beginning with evening courses in the YMCA in 189 8,
Northeastern went on to establish its first day college in
1909, and it has now become the largest private university
in the United States in terms of total enrollment.
In co-operative education, the student attends classes
on campus during alternate quarterly terms, and works off
campus at a program-related job in between. While he is at
school, another student takes over his work. Northeastern
officials have helped many other institutions in the United
States and abroad fashion such career-oriented programs.
Current enrollment is 37,0 00 college-credit students:
lM-,000 full-time undergraduates and 18 ,000 part-time. At
the graduate level enrollment is 1,300 full-time and 4,000
Much of the program of the University is offered at
its city campus on Huntington Avenue in Boston. In
addition, the University has its Suburban Campus in Bur-
lington, a Center for Continuing Education in Weston, a
Center for Physical Education and Recreation Education in
Ashland, and a Marine Science Institute in Nahant. In
the evenings , the Boston Campus and Suburban Campus are
fully occupied by part-time students, and six other
facilities in Greater Boston are used by the University
during weekday evenings to serve part-time students at
Faculty and Staff
Northeastern employs 1,680 people on a full-time basis --
670 faculty, 460 research, professional and administrative
personnel, and 550 in support roles. A further 1,000 part-time
faculty are employed in Boston and at the other locations
where evening programs are presented.
Schools and Programs
Since its early emphasis on engineering (which was the
basis of the first co-op program) , Northeastern has broadened
its curriculum into liberal arts and the professional fields
of business, education, pharmacy, and allied health pro-
fessions, nursing, criminal justice, and recreation. The
emphasis throughout has been on the many people in the local
area whose families have not had many members attending
university before. The co-operative program and the many
offerings to students able to attend university only part-
time have contributed to the general objective of the school
to offer education in forms not duplicated by other
institutions in Boston.
Originally Northeastern was strictly a local institu-
tion. As it has grown, it has attracted students from a
wider area. But more than half of its full-time and almost
all of its part-time students still come from the Boston
area, 12% of them from the city itself. About one-third of
the students receive financial aid. This is in addition
to wages received directly from co-operative employers.
Northeastern ' s Center for Continuing Education conducts
seminars on community problems and offers state-of-the-art
courses for the engineers and scientists in Boston's
research-oriented industries. Henderson House is a live-in
conference center in Weston. In-service training programs
have been organized to meet the needs of public service
employees in both state and Boston departments.
In the past, the administration of co-operative educa-
tion has been a unique feature of Northeastern; this
service is now being made available to other colleges and
universities throughout the country. The Institute for
Off-Campus Experience and Co-operative Education has been
created as a separate corporate entity which will purchase
space and faculty time from Northeastern. Grants from the
Braitmayer, Carnegie and Exxon Foundations are funding the
start-up costs until the effort can become self-supporting
with fees for its services.
Living alumni of Northeastern University total 57,450.
It is an impressive fact that 40,000 of these alumni live
in the state of Massachusetts and that 22,000 reside in the
Greater Boston area.
Northeastern ' s eight undergraduate colleges have
considerable autonomy in conducting their academic programs.
Their faculties also have general responsibility for the
programs for part-time students offered by the University
College and Lincoln College, as well as for graduate
offerings. The Division of Co-operative Education serves
all of the colleges and operates a center for research
and consulting services for other institutions. On the
graduate level there are eight graduate schools and a school
of law. Overall academic policies are the responsibility
of a faculty Senate with elected members from all colleges
and schools .
At the university level, the president is responsible
to the Board of Trustees.
For more information
Write or call :
President Asa S. Knowles
Boston, Massachusetts 02115
History and Purpose
Named for Charles Tufts , donor of its campus in the
northwest Boston suburb of Medford, Tufts University was
first chartered as a college in 1852. Adding a new engi-
neering school in 1865 and a divinity school in 1869, the
university has grown into a diversified academic center
including medical and dental schools. A longstanding
tradition of excellence, liberalism, and educational
variety focuses on sound instruction and personal achieve-
ment by each student.
Total university enrollment is now 5,312. Of this
total, 80% are on the main campus in Medford. Two thousand
of the 5,312 are graduate and professional students.
The main Tufts campus consists of a hundred buildings
on 150 acres of high land on the Medf ord-Somerville border
near the Mystic River. On this campus are Tufts College
(including liberal arts and engineering schools) , Jackson
College, the College of Special Studies, and the Fletcher
School of Law and Diplomacy (founded in 19 33 with a bequest
by Austin B. Fletcher).
In downtown Boston, as the educational units of the
Tufts-New England Medical Center, are the Tufts University
Schools of Medicine and Dental Medicine. The Stearns
Medical Research Building houses research facilities and
also the Tufts University-Boston School of Occupational
Therapy. In addition to the schools, the Center includes a
complex of teaching hospitals .
Tufts programs are also offered overseas — in London,
Paris, Tubingen, and West Africa.
Faculty and Staff
The university employs about 1,800 full-time faculty
and 1,400 part-time faculty and staff.
Schools and Programs
The Medford campus concentrates on undergraduate
education 5 with three-quarters of its students in this
category. Of the schools and colleges cited earlier in
this account, the Graduate School of Arts and Science
and the Fletcher School are the main graduate instruc-
tional centers at Medford.
In addition to the more traditional programs , a number
of innovative undergraduate programs have been introduced.
One example is Plans of Study, which allow students to
tailor their own areas of concentration. Others are the
College Within, through which students work under senior
faculty direction on comprehensive individualized projects,
and the Experimental College's seminars in a variety of
topics not included in the standard curriculum.
Associated with Tufts University are a number of
special educational facilities and research centers.
Specialized libraries complement the central support
facilities of the Nils Yngve Wessell Library, serving both
instructional and research support functions .
The Medford campus houses the Lincoln Filene Center
for Citizenship and Public Affairs. The Center sponsors
educational research, engages in teacher and staff train-
ing, and develops instructional resources and media.
Within the College of Dental Medicine and the Tufts-
New England Medical Center, research centers are devoted
to advancing medical knowledge, such as cancer research
and enzyme research.
Of the 33,000 living Tufts alumni, 28% live in the
Boston area. This group includes a wide variety of pro-
fessionals. In fact, more than half of the dentists and
about a third of the physicians in New England are Tufts
professional school graduates.
The Trustees of Tufts College have the sole legal
authority and responsibility for the governance of the
university. This authority is all-inclusive, although
faculty and students participate in policy determination
to a considerable extent.
For more information
Write or call :
President Burton C. Hallowell
Medford, Massachusetts 02155
UNIVERSITY OF MASSACHUSETTS AT BOSTON
History and Purpose
The Boston campus was opened to students in 1965, under
the impact of rising college enrollments on the part of
Massachusetts students and the inability of the Commonwealth
to meet this rising demand within then-present facilities.
The university has made a commitment to provide residents
of the Boston area, particularly those with low or moderate
incomes , with a range and quality of educational opportunity
equivalent to that available at Boston's private institutions --
and particularly to offer high-quality liberal arts and pre-
In September 1972, 5,662 students were enrolled at the
Boston campus. Of those students, 36% were residents of
the City of Boston, and 82% lived within a 15-mile radius,
of the city. The university's admissions policy has
generated a highly diverse student body, somewhat older
than average, with a rising minority group component, and
more than 10% Armed Services veterans.
Faculty and Staff
In September 1972, the University of Massachusetts/
Boston employed 350 faculty, 100 professional and admini-
strative personnel, and a support staff of 200 persons.
Schools and Programs
The initial Boston programs concentrated on the liberal
arts, and have resulted in the establishment of two liberal
arts colleges. A third college -- The College of Public
and Community Service — opened in the fall of 19 73,
emphasizes pre-prof essional programs in public administration
and community service. Preliminary planning is underway for
the development of a fourth college, also with career-
oriented program structure. In this way, UMass/Boston aims
at a diversity of academic options for its students.
Since its founding in 1965, UMass/Boston has graduated
approximately 3,2 00 students. Almost 8 percent of the
UMass/Boston alumni are currently living in the Boston
Metropolitan Area, and 94 percent live in the Commonwealth
UMass/Boston is one of the three campuses of the
University of Massachusetts and is governed by a 25-member
Board of Trustees. The Boston campus is operated under the
same general structure as that governing the University of
Massachusetts as a whole. Locally, the campus is directed
by a Chancellor.
UMass/Boston was established by Chapter 75 of the
General Laws of Massachusetts, Section 2, as amended. Its
enabling legislation states that it is "to provide, without
discrimination, education programs, research, extension
and continuing education services in the liberal arts and
sciences and in the professions, and in those professional
areas normally requiring either education beyond four years
of undergraduate training or a basic or advanced degree
beyond the bachelor's level..."
For more information
Write or call
Dr. Carlo Golino
University of Massachusetts at Boston
Boston, Massachusetts 02116
A. GENERAL APPROACH
Although economic impact studies had been conducted
before 19 71, they received additional support and guidance
through a report published by the American Council on
Education in that year: John Caffrey and Herbert H. Isaacs,
Estimating the Impact of a College or University on the
Local Economy" We have followed the suggestions of this
document , amended them in some ways , and profited from our
experience in applying them at the University of Pittsburgh
in the spring of 19 72. We have also benefited from reading
other economic impact studies.
The keynote of the approach is balance and objecti-
vity. Under the Caf f rey-Isaacs philosophy, the student is
advised to deal with both positive and negative aspects of
economic impact. As a result, he achieves greater credi-
bility than might obtain if only the positive aspects of
impact were discussed. This principle has been adhered to
in this project. However, it is also true that many aspects
of university impact have not been dealt with -- such as
those regarding communication with neighbors , expansion
plans that pre-empt property nearby , participation in
community projects aligned with community (not university)
goals, and so on. We have, on the other hand, tried to make
a balanced account of the impacts on the community as these
are manifested in cash flows .
Figure B.l illustrates diagrammatically , the principal
elements in the study's conceptual scheme. It does not
reflect the varying quality of data used nor the important
omissions from what is primarily a "cash flow" analysis.
Among the university contributions to the community not fully
explored in the broader social context are: (1) effects on
local culture and the quality of life in Boston and else-
where; (2) practical value of education to the students who
receive it, in psychic and life-income terms; (3) impact of
Boston research centers on man's knowledge of himself and
his environments; (4) details on the impact of health science
education and practice on local health care delivery; and
(5) impact of knowledge-based industries on the New England
economy. To get the highest quality data, university
records have been searched diligently and many questions
asked of faculty, staff and students. Still, surveys have
to be interpreted. Judgment enters into statistics -- and
is influenced by the results of similar studies done in
other places on other schools. Confidence levels are, how-
Main Economic Impact Study Components
£ Fee s
Pro j ect s
Jobs £ Taxes
ever, high enough to support the informational objectives of
B. SOURCES OF DATA
The study used several sources of data:
1. University records.
2. University reports to public agencies, such
as the U.S. Office of Education and local
3. Civic records of assessment, taxes, and
federal statistics on family expenditure,
income, and retail sales.
4. Surveys of faculty, staff, students, and
visitors designed and carried out specially
for this project.
5. Opinions and judgments of project personnel
and people in the community on measurement
of variables not amenable to sampling or
available from previous research.
6 . Computer-based statistics from the First
National Bank of Boston, plus the support
of bank personnel in local economic
7. Documents and assistance from the New England
Board of Higher Education, especially its
booklet, FACTS 1972-73 .
C. DATA PROCESSING AND ANALYSIS
The data processing of the survey information was
carried out at the Computing Center of Boston University,
under the direction of Sylvia Fleisch -- who gave continual
support in computational suggestions and interpretation of
results. Datatext and SPSS were the packages used to array
responses , compute arithmetic means , medians , and standard
Cut-off points were assigned to many of the responses
in the staff and student surveys, but in fact made almost
no difference in the final results. As in other surveys of
this kind , when people were asked to estimate amounts of
money spent per period on various items, their multi -peaked
distributions made interpretation more difficult than one
would ideally like. In such cases, the consultants' judg-
ment and the experience of other projects were applied to
interpret the computations. One problem was, of course, to
differentiate non-responses and zero responses in the
process of weighting the sample results for estimation of
the values of the universes. For example, if 50% of the
students fail to respond to a question about their bank
accounts , do we conclude that half of the student body do
not have such accounts?
The survey policy was that all queries would be anony-
mous and confidential. This is, we feel, a necessary
condition in projects of this type in the university
community. Under such a survey rule, we could not follow up
the non-respondents or check responses with the people who
made them. However, there was a minimum of nonsense and
frivolity, which in turn is partly a tribute to the interest
that economic impact studies have for many people.
D. INCORPORATION OF OTHER INSTITUTIONS
Although the study was launched with the intent to
cover only the eight major universities of the Greater Boston
area, a decision was made later to include the smaller
colleges and universities of the region. The study area,
for this purpose as well as for the main effort, was as the
Standard Metropolitan Statistical Area of Boston as defined
by the U.S. Census. This is a rather peculiar urban area,
not following county lines as such similar areas do in parts
of the country where county lines are judged to be more
relevant to socio-economic variances.
The other 57 colleges and universities of the area were
invited to submit the general financial and student data to
the central project group, and to contribute to the project
in return for receiving progress and final reports. A sub-
stantial minority of the institutions cooperated. Their
returns were extrapolated — mainly by use of enrollment
figures -- into estimates for the whole group.
E. THE IMPORTANCE OF COOPERATION
Many people worked together with the most gratifying
harmony to produce this study. We have acknowledged some of
these in the Preface and in notes in the text. This,
however, is only part of the story.
The main element of cooperation in an economic impact
study is from the specific individuals possessing needed
information: faculty and staff who reply to questionnaires;
students who submit to interviews and tell about their
expenditure patterns ; parents of students who reply to
questions about their visits ; the part-time students who
submit to sidewalk interviews ; the officials in the insti-
tutions who work to gather university information for
their representatives on the steering committee. All
these ingredients are necessary. In this project they were
brought together and reinforced by the efforts of all the
members of the steering committee. They were dedicated to
their task. They received strong support from their
respective Presidents. The report is the product of this